More
51/49, DD, balance of power, power exchange, respect, trust, etc…
I’ve given the whole idea of equality among people, men and women in particular, and the relative balance of power in relationships a lot of thought over the years. I personally don’t believe that there really is a possibility for there to be true equality in a marriage, partnership or any relationship for that matter. Each of us brings different strengths and weaknesses and different talents and abilities to the equation, and out of that, by pure pragmatic necessity, in each different situation, imbalance is forced and just plain simply natural. I believe that our worth, value and mutual respect are more important concepts than equality is, especially as absolutes, and if equality must come into the equation, in my opinion, it really does so as a qualifier for those more pertinent ideas.
Those of us wired to prefer the bottom or submissive role, not just in the bedroom but also in the emotional, spiritual and psychological dynamics of our lives as a couple, possess unique strengths and weaknesses; as do those wired to prefer the Top or Dominant role. When well matched, the strengths of each blend well to make a stronger whole. My best example is when someone with the ability and strong need to lead and be decisive is partnered with someone with the opposite ability and need to support and nurture that is also strong, the result is a much more successful team than couples who compete for the lead, or conversely share the need to be lead. That’s not all I believe in this regard either. When couples are well matched, often their relative weaknesses also dovetail with each other’s strengths such that they are offset and lose some of their potential to undermine. The example I have from my own experiences is that when both have stubborn or selfish tendencies, their stronger lead and support bond can, with communication and insight mitigate the potential discord. Every couple has to deal with the impact of their additive weaknesses though. Respect, trust and the capacity to be understanding, communicate and of course keep their love in sight are the answer to that.
Well I’m sure that’s clear as mud. To recap hopefully for clarity; I just don’t believe that men and women or any couple, of any gender are really equal in the literal sense of the word, I believe we are each different, unique individuals who bring different strengths, weaknesses, talents and potential to the table.
That said, I also believe that the laws of attraction are part of a divine design that tends to bring these unequal but complimentary sets of strengths, talents and potential together, especially when we as individuals listen to the hints and cues (insights) life constantly bounces our way about ourselves.
50/50 certainly defines the mutuality of choosing to embark on a DD partnership that include spanking, discipline and the dominance and submission required to do that in a manner that is healthy.
51/49 for me at least acknowledges the different relative strengths of a couple who’ve decided that the unforeseen disputes will be placed on the table, all sides and possibilities examined and when that’s done, one of them own the deciding vote. The truth of this balance being that already very compatible beliefs, values, desires and goals will rarely ever force this card to need to be played.
The balance of power could shift significantly should discipline or punishment come up, but I believe again that reciprocal needs are being met when these acts are undertaken. The power exchange again is mutual (and should be). There may be moments when the dynamic approaches 100/0 or hovers to 70/30, especially when I’m not initially on the right page, but the mutuality of this lifestyle choice and my ethical commitment to it and us, out of necessity will eventually shift it back to where it is implement or hand to butt until the distressor is dealt with, catharsis accomplished and balance restored.
I would say 50/50 DD aptly describes those relationships where both partners spank and are spanked, and where this occurs to accomplish not just clearing the air for the person on the spanking end, but also for the person who determines that a spanking administered to the other will clear their lingering feelings.
For me, 51/49 acknowledges our mutuality, his role as the careful decider should there be conflict, my role understanding and owning my need to be honest when I need catharsis, and our shared desire to be Top and Bottom, such that, should he ever just need to spank, just as I am allowed to ask to be spanked, he can ask to spank.
Of course it’s probably obvious that I’m not a feminist, though I’m not anti feminism either. I’m humanist I think. I believe that our differences, male to female, Top to bottom, Dominant to submissive are a much more valuable study than arbitrary concepts like equality … expressing the possible balance of power in DD numerically is more a means to inspire introspection and discussion than define it for any one.
Thanks to all of you who have let it bounce around in your brain and examined it against your truth.
March 30th, 2007 at 11:27 am
Patty, I’ve read your previous post on 51/49 along with the comments and this post. Life and work right now are such that I don’t have time to give these posts the headspace they deserve. I want to come back over the weekend (time allowing!) and reread all of this.
This is a very thought provoking post. I had never thought of the balance in those terms before and I ran across the same thing on another blog this week, but can’t for the life of me remember whose blog it was on. It’s been gnawing at my brain since you posted Tuesday.
~Hugs and have a great weekend
March 30th, 2007 at 2:21 pm
Patty, great post and well thought out.
I tend to dislike cut and dried solutions to relationships, as each partnership is unique, I like the idea of a sliding rule, each situation demands a different equation.
The success of a partnership or marriage relies on how well each partner solves their part of the equation.
That’s about as far as I’ve thought.
Love and warm hugs,
Paul.
March 30th, 2007 at 9:06 pm
Patty, I have been both a personal and professional student of the different generations and self definitions of feminism. I think you are a feminist… at least if you choose the definition that says women have the right to seek their own happiness as defined by themselves, whatever a male or other society might define as what they “ought” to want. Why should a DD power differential mean that a relationship is not balanced? Does one partner being spanked make them the “lesser” partner? I think not, and you think not, too.
Are we to believe that in DD relationships the Top never compromises with the Bottom? That the feelings of the spankee are never taken into account? Neither you nor I believe that in a good DD relationship this is true. So I really am not quite sure what, or with whom, you are arguing when you bring up the 51/49 question? I think is is fairly clear who is in control when someone is being spanked. What else happens day by day? Is it abusive or respectful?
so how are things going with John?
March 30th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
Patty,
what you say is perfectly clear and provokes a lot of thought. I agree with your thoughts. I don’t don’t think though that a DD relationship can ever be 100/0 or 50/50.
Even if you’ve given someone complete control over your whole life, you will always still have the option to leave, unless he’s physically keeping you from going and in that case it’s abuse not DD. Even in a master/slave relationship you still have that right and there will still be many instances (He’s away, you’re gone while he’s at home etc) where you’d be faced with having to make decisions on your own without getting permission from
him first.
I also think that no relationship can be 50/50. Whether it be a love relationship, family realationship or friends, work or team relationships. There always has to be one person who is ultimately in charge and hopefully will work together with the others to make things run smoothly. I don’t think there is one person on this earth who is not held accountable to anyone. I think that acknowledging and accepting that fact keeps a lot of blowups from occurring and a DD relationship is pretty much based on both parties acknowledging and accepting it As long as he doesn’t take over so much control that he’s running a dictatorship and she doesn’t give over so much control that she is more like a child in the relationship or a puppet who he makes to be just what he wants her to.
Both sides have to look for support from the other while the other should be willing to give it. whether it be a spanking occuring just because she or he needs it, her taking charge of the finances because she is an accountant and more knowledgeable in that area even if he believes that that should be a “man’s job.” Also the amount of control each has is not static. Something could take him out of commision for awhile and they both need to be prepared to change roles and activities without necessarily changing the amount of power either one of them holds in the relationship. She may have to be the soul breadwinner and take care of his needs for a while, while he still holds the HOH role that he had before.. If they can do that without him feeling like less of a “man” or HOH, or her feeling less feminine or submissive, to themselves and to each other then I think they’ve got a very successful DD relationship.
I wouldn’t say I’m not a feminist, but I see feminism a women having the choice to do whatever they want and not suffer for that choice based only on the fact that she is female. That choice could be to remain completely independent and work at a “man’s job” that she is just as good at,or it could be to work that same job or any other while also choosing to live in a DD relationship where she is the bottom or it could be to be a mother and a housewife and a submissive to her husband. It all comes down to choice.
Whoa Patty, you really got me thinking with this as you can tell by the legnth of this post. It’s a great topic.
Love,
Becca
March 31st, 2007 at 8:02 am
Hi Patty,
With the others who have posted I say, “Wow! You’ve delved really deep with this one…” Obviously, many–if not most or all of us have given this topic a geat deal of thought over the years. It goes hand in hand with the idea of all power exchange.
A lot of good points have been made. With Edwardotk, I would agree that you ARE a feminist, honey. Not in the defiant or militant sense of wanting to “wear the pants…” Rather, you are one in the sense that you as a woman are free to decide for your own self what you want out of life and out of a relationship. And you are not bound by any societal restrictions which would force you into a narrow or strictly limited set of options.
With Paul I would agree wholehearedly that every relationship is completely unique as are the individuals who comprise t. And so, each one must hammer out their own compromises and find their own way–for themselves.
Pat, you have said you like “humanist” better than feminist as an ascription. Well said. We should ALL of us be humanists. We are members of a large human family and any attempt to marginalize some portion of that whole–based on any kind of grouping that would look upon some as better and others as lesser–is just plain wrong.
God has created every human with dignity and worth. This is why I think the concept of equality IS important at all times. By turning the other way when a certain segment is being misused or discriminatted against diminshes all of us–in our humanity. We as a chain are only as strong as our weakest link[s].
But, in the present context of discussing an intimate relationship–I think your point about there being no 50/50s is mostly correct. I would assert that for a select few (who truly desire it) there does exist the possibility of a perfectly equal split.
I would also, however, agree with you that most of us don’t realy want that. We would prefer instead to live with a balance which more accurately reflects the relative strengths and weaknesses of our particular given dynamic.
First, let me say that in all relationships there is a flux and flow which is always at play and that the percentages we have tossed about with various numbers describe not a static set-in-stone rule–but a point to which the balance returns after it has undrgone one of its many tweaks or bumps. This level is one which the couple (hopefully) is comfortable with, and one which they have accepted and agreed upon.
Even with that, however… all relationships are such that they require continuous communication adn daily compromises on things largely small and sometimes great–to move forward and grow. Anything which tries to stand still and unchanging is destined to be left behind or wither.
A note to Becca–your point about the woman being able to exercise her free will to leave at any time is an important aspect of her choice to submit. No one is ever anyone’s property (although some may wish to assume this as a role to a greater or lesser extent.) I think this notion is critical because it goes back to the idea of feminism (as defined by being able to choose your own happiness.)
But I wanted to correct a terminological point. If the top doesn’t allow the bottom to leave–that isn’t just abuse–it’s kidnapping! It’s forcced captivity. My very favorite American. Abraham Lincoln–freed the slaves. No one should ever have to reamin anywhere against their will.
Love,
John
P.S. To Edwardotk–Patty and are doing just fine!
March 31st, 2007 at 3:05 pm
Patty Dear,
Just a quick comment from me, a very young at heart 62 year old, “What ever you do don’t let that man get away” He’s a jewel, a “Keeper” as we say when we girls get together. He seems perfect for you.
I learn something here each time I drop by. Great article, keep them comming.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:55 pm
Hey MaggieDear if anyone understands work pressures getting in the way it’s me. When you can I’m looking forward to your thoughts.
No question Paul flexibility and induviduality are paramount. Both partners seeking compromise and balance is essential, and then with us, those choosing M/f DD, the acknowleged lead is his.
Edward, it would be interesting to discuss your study of feminism in greater detail. Yes, I suppose I display certain feminist traits in that I have and use my voice speaking to and expecting acceptance that everyone especially other women should respect the rights & needs of other women, and that all of us deserve to be valued. But John explains my humanist point of view better than I do. The inherent realtive value and vitality of each contribution of each of us in the weaving of the complex blanket that is humanity is where we really need to place our hearts.
I ruffled feathers once on the old msn group California Spanked Wives Club when I spoke up in a thread about a spanker who invoked his needs over the bottom’s needs. While at the time I naively ignored the context (the pair in question were one time casual partner who met for the 1st time at a spanking at a party)- of the initial discussion, the tone of the discussion bothered me on a deep level. I firmly hold my point of view… The spanker’s needs deserve consideration and respect as much as the bottom’s. In a committed relationships where spanking and/or discipline become an agreed part of their realtionship this truth only becomes stronger, in my opinion.
When the need for spanking is mutual it becomes equal to the other needs partners share like the need for touch, love, understanding, patience, tolerence and sex. Women simply should not get special gender embued dispensation to withhold any of these things simply because they are women and there’s a history of exploitation, nor should a bottom/submissive get to withhold their consent to being spanked or dominated simply because they aren’t in the mood. Mutuality should always involve a loving and selfless give and take, and frankly, it is my opinion that that give and take goes both ways ALLWAYS. Hence my agreement with you that on occasion at least in the transient evolution of any specific instance, the DD(D/s) dynamic could become shifted toward 100/0.
Compromise between Top & bottom is a given. Finding common ground in disputes is essential. DD & D/s couples are not exempt from the mandatory communications every other couple need to engage in. I think the catharsis we benefit from when it comes to closing conflict gives some of us an edge when it comes to maintaining balance though.
You make many good points Becca thank you. 50/50, 51/49, 60/40/ 100/0… not a one of these relatve balances really matters as much as the exporation of thoughts and exploration of what a partnership that includes power exchange and spanking might include. When I spoke of 100/0 I was mainly referring to those transient moments when I’m in a temper and am not immediately open to coming down. My personality needs that hard stop now & then. I respond to it. Would I ever advocate for 100/0 for any other woman? That would have to be her choice (hopefully one she makes with her partner), and it would out of necessity come from a place of trust. When trust is betrayed, mutuality and consent are betrayed. Of course the bottom must be free to refuse and/or leave.
John
Thanks for your words here…. Just so you know, I’ve already given you the 2% advantage on the basic level, because I already know that you’re captured by our 50/50, and I’m very committed to the sliding scale, even though I wish it wasn’t going to come to a challenge for either of us. Everyone here should know you’ve already embraced those areas where my strengths bolster yours.
The very neatest blessing is how you completely elude comparisons to Fred and just are your own person, matching me your way. Love you back
Emmy I’m going to do my very best to keep him. MY very, very best.
Love y’all
patty
April 1st, 2007 at 7:36 pm
OMG! As I was reading, I thought 50/50 DD was a bra size! Hee hee.
Patty, this is a deep post. I forgot how much I love reading your thoughts. I need to catch up. I am so appreciative that you are still in the blogging world. You are unique and wonderful.Want to share part of my name? You can be smart and ??? Nahhhh, Patty does just fine.
I liked what you said about feminism. I’m not either but I’m not anti as well. Well written, dear friend!
Love,
Nancy
April 2nd, 2007 at 5:41 pm
Hi Patty
I’ve beeen out of touch for a few days but will digest this and comment later
Love and peace to all
Jim