Love-hate relationship with the belt, cont.

It’s very common and understandable that spankees have a love/hate relationship with the instruments of their persuasion. What’s less fully articulated is spankers’ ambiguities towards their implements. In my ongoing quest to interrogate the mind of a Top – for myself most of all – I offer a thought or two about the belt.

First let me say that I’m set thinking on this by a great blog “This is How it Feels” by Poppy St Vincent, where she reposts the following (Real Spankings) picture and says:

“This is how it feels when he takes his belt off and you know he is going to use it on your bottom. It is a very scary feeling and it makes you want to curl up but you also want a cuddle and to sit on his lap but the problem is that half of you wants to run away for miles and miles and miles and the other half wants to reach for his strong arms and snuggle down in them so tight that no one other than him will ever even know where you are.”

It is a great picture! (For my taste I find Real Spankings a bit “obvious”. Yes, high on production values, but low on originality or insight. From what I’ve seen, from a distance, over the years it’s always a bit like a high school production — good technique, yet limited in mind and therefore somehow always pedestrian.) But, anyway, the point is that this picture escapes that. The push-pull of her emotions is uniquely captured.

Here’s the good and bad of the belt for me. The bad is in the ‘I’m-gonna-tan-yer-hide’-belt-removal which is inescapably (possibly in every culture!) associated with low-life scum. The image conjures the dumb swine with a beer in one hand and a fag in one other, stomach flopping out his shirt, who whose first resort to the problem of his crumbling authority is to yank his belt from it loops.

Each to his/her own – but, personally, this is an image I run from.

The good in the belt is that it is a great implement. It has the advantage of being part of the everyday rather than bespoke “kinky ware.” Also, assuming it is wide enough, it also provides a great whack at relatively little bottom damage. I find with a belt I can give a good, hot, bottom-thrashing, while knowing she’s actually … really… fine.

What a girl wants

Because of my just-no-time-for-tv life, I have no idea what ‘Glee’ is or who this particular character is. (As a media junkie of a sort, that feels weird.) But I had to smile at this little piece of deadpan double-entendre, which gives me hope that are still a few real minds at work, gnawing away at the margins, pushing back the puritan disneyfication of our screens.

Alas, no, I don’t know what happened next. Would be happy to be filled in … 😉

I picked this up on the gloriously titled blog: ‘A rambling editorial on life as a grown-up. a mother and a submissive wife: Life at a Kinky House

Why domestic discipline is the hardest thing of all

It’s well known to anthropologists that props or devices facilitate special-occasion behaviour. People make a special time and place to do special activities, that often goes with special dress. In the world of kinky it works this way precisely. One puts on the black leathers, high boots, corset & lace, gets out the “toys,” dims the lights, has another sip of champagne, and becomes ready to immerse in an alternative reality. The process of transition from who we are and how we behave in the everyday to who we are in alternative reality is smoothed by adopting signals and codes of the alternative. We therein also keep it contained in its particular time and place.

Domestic discipline is typically done in everyday clothes, in everyday situations, in full light. There is no transitional “help”, nor containing devices. This is why it is, to me, the highest and purest of the spanking arts. It most clearly says: this is part of who we actually are, in the everyday, not just what identies we can inhabit in the dim half-light of alternative realities. It is authority integrated with the cups of tea and messy desks of real life. Because there is nowhere, psychologically, to “hide”, it is also the most psychologically risky thing to do. And therefore the most productive of real intimacy.

One can interpret pictures on many ways. To me these, below, tell the exact story. Picture credit: Kate’s Spanking World (defunct).

spank1

spank2

spank3

spank4

The 1950s and times past, sublimated, resurfacing as fantasy

1950s-spanking One of the sites I’ve learnt a bit from in the past few weeks is Fetlife, which is something of a Facebook for the kinky community. The total list of kinks one can subscribe to (fess up to?) is amazing. Stuff I’d never thought of. I’m such a classic spanker that 98% of the list just passes me by. (There is much to say about bondage and spanking, and spanking vs bdsm from the spanker point of view, but I’ll leave that for future posts.)

But one of the things that struck me in the kink list – and to which I subscribed – is “1950s lifestyle.” Got to love this well-known coffee ad alongside…

But what is “1950s lifestyle” as a “kink” saying? It’s saying, what was normal in the 1950s is a bona-fide sexual kink now. How can that be? Yes, we know from psychology that “normal” is a social construct that moves around. But I think there is even more to it.

I think nothing fundamental (“archetypal” if you like) in the human psyche can be buried. Sometimes social norms allow a behaviour to be given fuller expression; sometimes they contrict it. When constricted, the practice goes behind closed doors, or behind closed fantasy eyelids. But it doesn’t go away.

In this case, the unburiable archetype is the Head of Household (HoH), as protector, mentor, and final authority – and the safety and structure in this. Yes, the world has moved on, and women’s empowerment and fuller lives and careers as real earners and decision-makers is an excellent thing.

But this is a new turn in a long, long human history. It presses on the archetype that presses back, that must surface somewhere. When we spank or are being spanked, we are letting out, playing out, and reaffirming this very core element of the human psyche. It is so fundamental and presumably (I’m no anthropologist) was functional in creating surviving human groups that, like much of our physical and social response structure inherited from ages past, is deeply written into our psychic makeup.