![[PukiWiki]](image/pukiwiki.png "[PukiWiki]")
https://cutt.ly/mF44eqH https://cutt.ly/GF44o6Y https://cutt.ly/oF44fFG https://cutt.ly/VF44jpv https://cutt.ly/ZF44zpu https://cutt.ly/9F44v2L https://cutt.ly/7F44Qpo https://cutt.ly/BF44RxD Noone's words spoke of consensual nonconsent to me. In particular this bit (italics mine) A woman knows that the pain visited on her bottom is meaningful only if the man does it because he loves her. Otherwise, she will build a stonewall around her emotions. . She knows it's meaningful because she knows he's doing it because he loves her. There has to be some dialogue for that knowledge to be available to her. If she even for a minute doubts his reasons, she'll clam up on him. And that knowledge certainly couldn't be gained through some creepy scene with a pyschopath beating her up whilst crooning "I'm only doing it because I love you". I am a grown woman - I don't need B (or anyone else, for that matter) to teach me right from wrong by the use of physical discipline. However, B having control over me (taking control away from me?) is a very effective means of stopping negative/destructive behaviour. It's also both non-arousing and arousing at the same time. I may not want the spanking, and so am not aroused by the thought of it, but B's control is arousing, and so I get aroused despite myself. Not always though - there are times I just appreciate it as a means of stopping a situation spiralling out of control and returning me to myself. It's not something I've ever found infantalising - partly because I am not being treated as a naughty child, and partly, I suspect, because I never was given an OTK spanking as a child - a few slappings, yes, but not what I'd term a spanking. And, of course, because I've agreed to it (consensual non-consent again...)
