"...but suck just ONE COCK........"
[ Apologies to Motol (not Moishe).....who as far as I could tell, never sucked any cocks in "Fiddler on the Roof", but who had the perfect gesture to illustrate the punchline.]
Think about the specific conditions we all accept regarding labels that are not written down anywhere, but pretty much understood. You have to sing fairly often and publicly to be considered a 'singer', but you only have to kill one person in private to be a 'murderer'. One sex partner and you're no longer a 'virgin', but how many beyond one do you need before "slut" applies?
And so, how pervasive does a female partner's control have to be before what you are doing is “FLR”? Does it have to be the last word in EVERYTHING? Including things the wife has no expertise in? Or does very limited authority count as long as it is fairly one-sided? How many times does a husband have to obey his wife in order for their relationship to be somewhat defined by that dynamic? How many things can he resist being controlled in before it is no longer that type of relationship?
I may have mentioned before that prior to Rosa I was engaged in a play relationship with a woman who was very active in groups and parties. We were not in a relationship or even romantically inclined. We just had a play agreement that seemed mutually satisfying. Interestingly, one of the things I remember well from the time we were together was a recurring criticism from her that I was "not a true submissive". I remember countering her accusation with a simple question: "What have you ever asked of me that I refused?" She stopped, blinked a few times in thought, and then made a telling admission, "you're right," she said, "you have done whatever I've asked and accepted whatever I've wanted to do to you." And then she added what proved to be HER qualifier: "But you never act submissive no matter what you are doing or having done to you." Interestingly, we went on to discuss this and she admitted that other men she topped had way more restrictions than I did, and did far less.....but all acted more deferential and meek and so to her seemed more submissive, even though I was doing more than they were. It was something that caused us both to reconsider how we label things.
I have long been amused by the irony of people (including myself) rationalizing various aspects of what we do with mental gymnastics and selective compartmentalization. But how silly is some of that when you’re bent over?
Even if this young lady only agreed to a session of paddling and not to a life of obedience and service......would it be unreasonable to think her Top is really not going to let a prior insult fuel his spanking enthusiasm?
Regardless of what you’ve agreed to, how reasonable is it to think that certain thoughts are not running through a dominant disciplinarian’s head just because they were never agreed to? Has a Top.....even a part-time one, never punished someone for one thing while not possibly thinking of something else that they are wise enough to not say aloud?
I think for me that's the main qualifier of who's doing the "leading"......even if that person isn't deciding which investment to make or what car to purchase.