The Library of Spanking Fiction: Wellred Weekly

Wellred Weekly
Volume 2, Number 2 : August 19, 2013
Items of interest regarding all things spanking

Spanking For Jesus? A Refutation
by Jason's Girl

This article relates to an item that was featured in the Daily Beast on 19th Jun 2013 entitled Spanking for Jesus: Inside the Unholy World of 'Christian Domestic Discipline' which can be found here.
Recently, the Daily Beast interviewed Clint and Chelsea from Learning Domestic Discipline. Not surprisingly, the interview painted quite a negative picture of DD. I was happy to see Clint and Chelsea gave their sides of the story and I commend them for putting themselves on the line like this. Subsequently, there's been a surge of interest in Domestic Discipline, both negative and positive but as I read the article it angered me. There are so many things wrong with it that it's hard to even know where to begin.

The article itself went viral, the Huffington Post caught on, and the witch hunt for men who spank their wives went into full swing. I believe it's important to refute such an article as there are a great many people like myself who desire DD, who benefit from DD, but have deep-seated reservations. They wonder if they're normal and whether there might be something wrong with them. I am part of a couple who practice Domestic Discipline and would never want to stop. I am, however, by no means an abused wife - in fact, I feel loved, cherished and cared for, and my marriage of over a decade has never been better. So here's a refutation from someone in the trenches.

When I first read the article Spanking for Jesus, the initial thought going through my mind was, "But what about consent?" The writer of this article, Ms. Zadrozny, seems to have spent some time in the world of DD, on blogs and forums, reading just enough to paint an inaccurate picture, but not enough to really know what she's talking about. Journalism at its best, eh?

There are many issues I have with this article, but I'll begin with the first three: Consent, consent, consent. Did it escape your notice, Ms. Zadrozny, that the vast majority of couples who practice DD do so because the wife desired it? There is a phrase we in the DD community use: SSC DD - Safe, Sane, Consensual Domestic Discipline. This is not Ned Flanders spanking his wife because she burnt supper and Jesus told him to teach her a thing or two. Good grief. This is a practice used by couples who desire to grow closer together by embracing traditional roles. Period.

The second major issue I have with this article is that the huge majority of Christians who practice DD do not do so because they think Jesus wants them to. How do I know this? Because I've spent a good deal of time in the community. There are many couples who practice DD who are Christian - they believe the husband is the head of the house and that the Bible endorses this concept. They believe DD brings them closer together and is a means of making their marriage stronger but there are very few couples who believe DD is commanded by scripture. There are some that do, and if it works for them, I'm not going to rock that boat but this is by no means the norm within DD circles. Not even close. In fact, off the top of my head, I can name several dozen couples I know who are Christians who practice DD, and not a single one of them believe DD is commanded by scripture. My husband and I certainly fit into this category.

The third major issue I have, which is perhaps the most disturbing accusation of all, revolves around the accusation of abuse. According to Ms. Zadrozny's misguided opinion, husbands who spank their wives are no different from men who beat their wives. Is there the potential that a man given the power to discipline his wife could abuse that power? Yes, of course. There's also the potential that a loving husband making love to his wife could rape her.

A horrifying thought? It is. Frankly, the thought of their husbands abusing them is just as horrifying to a DD couple as the thought of a husband raping his wife. Abuse is motivated by control. Domestic Discipline is motivated by love. Abuse forces one's will on another but Domestic Discipline is based on mutual consent. Abuse belittles and demeans whilst Domestic Discipline draws a couple closer together. Abuse is based on fear but Domestic Discipline is based on trust.

So no, Ms. Zadrozny, we are not abused women. In fact, it must've been pretty damn hard for you to dig through the piles of blogs of happy DD couples to find the select few who say it doesn't work for them. They do exist, of course, because we are human and people make mistakes. Not everyone is perfect and just as marriage does not always work out for everyone, certainly a DD arrangement isn't going to work out for everyone. The reasons are many and varied but to equate DD with domestic violence? Puh-lease. Not by a long shot. In fact, Kat from "My Contented Home" gives a beautiful illustration about the difference between the abuse she suffered in the past and the loving marriage she now has, in a marriage that incorporates Domestic Discipline. Oh and if anyone gives credence to the supposed 'mental health experts' quoted in this article, I urge you to go on over and read the View of a Mental Health Professional in a DD relationship of her own!

Now for the accusation that this is all about a sexual fetish. Let's be honest, there is no question of the erotic appeal of Domestic Discipline, none whatsoever. Most people agree that being taken in hand is hot. In my humble opinion, the vast majority of DD couples never would have agreed to a DD arrangement if it were not for the erotic undertones. Being punished is not hot. We'll save the real sexy stuff for the good girl spankings. If this were all about sex, there would be no benefit other than a few good orgasms. But couples who are in a DD relationship report so much more than that. When a couple takes the steps to define their roles in a more traditional light, a funny thing happens. They find themselves drawn closer together and marital discord becomes a thing of the past. Although intimacy increases astronomically there is far more at play here than hanky spanky games.

The fact remains, women want real men. We need look no further than popular books and movies to prove this fact. Who are the most popular male leads? The alpha males. What is the appeal of Christian Gray, I ask? He is a sexy dominant man and women want real men. We want men who take charge. Deep in our bones we want to know we are with a man who will protect us even when that means protecting us from ourselves.

Of course there are no brick and mortar Domestic Discipline churches, as the article puts it, because it's not a religion - it's not even a lifestyle! It is a personal, private choice a couple makes. My husband and I share our DD arrangement with very few people we know in real life, not because we are ashamed, or because it's embarrassing, but because it is a highly personal decision, like sharing intimate, personal details of our sex life.

The article states that people who practice DD are a secretive group and I'd consider this to be absolutely correct. However, the reason given for the anonymity is completely off base. Ms. Zadrozny suggest it is because we are largely ashamed of our choices, and because we want to keep lying to ourselves about the real reasons we desire DD. Not true, Ms. Zadrozny. I don't keep my identity hidden because I'm ashamed of my choices. I keep my identity hidden because of people like you.

For those of you who desire DD look deeper than the outrageous accusations in this article. You are not alone. For those of you in a DD relationship, if this works for you, give no thought to those like Ms. Zadronzy who misunderstand and misrepresent. If this works for you, do it, and know you are not alone.

Jasons's Girl writes for The Taming of the Shrew blog:

  Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19