|
Post by jaydubs on Apr 9, 2009 22:58:31 GMT -5
So they want to give their kink religious sanction? Well, the Hindus beat them to that one...
|
|
|
Post by gadfly on Apr 28, 2009 0:58:58 GMT -5
The more I read about this, the more I get seriously creeped out, as in here: www.christiandd.com/articles/bethany1.htmlIt just strikes me as wrong because the woman is reduced to the level of a child. I know that technically both parties have 'consented' to it, but I just feel like there must be some deeper, unmet psychological issue which would compel a woman to in all seriousness, with no erotic play, want to be seriously "disciplined" by her husband. It really does seem psychologically damaged and abusive to me. It just feels wrong to me because it seems so much like the advice I read once, to women by another woman, to "pout" like a child when they are really angry with their husbands; in other words, mask their true emotions by acting like a little girl and trying to be cutesy, not acting like a grown-up and saying what was on their minds. It just seems symptomatic of some deep problem, IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by devilschaplain2 on Apr 28, 2009 1:11:30 GMT -5
Which is why, when the Mrs. misbehaves, you've gotta pop her once in the jaw for good measure. Jesus will respect you for it.
|
|
|
Post by Angel Kaida on Apr 28, 2009 1:14:06 GMT -5
If there's some kind of deep unmet need, what's wrong with fixing it by making it functional within a consensual relationship? Maybe something is psychologically necessary, for reasons of "damage" or otherwise - who are we to decide it's abusive or for the wrong reasons, if the "victim" has thought it through and decides otherwise? I frankly think a lot of our conceptions of mental health and functionality are flawed - while we may take it as necessarily true, is it actually self-evident that, for instance, "being a grownup" and being mentally healthy excludes making the decision to let someone else make your decisions, within reason? And why should anything whatsoever be kept "in the bedroom," aside from the bed (except on very special occasions )? Aside from the very big issue that this holds a "you either consent to this or God smites you" connotation (and may come accompanied by the fundie culture of misogyny, which has its own baggage), and that I'm not sure these people are being as careful as I'd personally hope, I have little problem with what these people are doing. And frankly, I think some of the people who are criticizing it are treading a pretty tenuous line.
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on Apr 28, 2009 11:29:12 GMT -5
This is not a parody. See: Feministing.com | Wife-Spanking 101: Neither Parody Nor Porn, a post from a feminist blog about this site. It points out various scary, misogynistic things, such as what madamescarlet mentioned, the fact that the only reason they don't support forcing it is because it's illegal. That statement is actually still on the site: They took it down! Here's what it says now: And what it used to say: Try as I might, I can't find that article they mention. I doubt missing that sentence changes anything, kinda like a certain church with a 100+page thread on here. Just because a statement says so doesn't mean the members adhere to it.
|
|