Admittedly, this is a cute little cartoon and it echoes a sentiment that I have heard too many times. I do find it interesting that the creator of this chose to illustrate a desire for a spanking's reality by using a cliche "dominatrix". (because we DD folk all use fetish gear to emphasize the reality of what we are doing, right?)
Even if we overlook the Dominatrix, what can be said about the veracity of such a claim in general? Only tears prove a spanking is real? Really? I think I and my currently tender butt might have some objection to that. I tend not to cry much.............except during certain movies..........but does that mean I am not being genuinely affected by my punishments? I don't think so.
To me a 'real' spanking is any spanking given for a real instance of misbehavior or one given to emphasize a power dynamic in a way that the submissive is not "enjoying" in a playful or sexual way. But that's only my opinion. One could easily counter that if the spanking is not imagined, it is real........and they'd have a point. My definition is based not on an objective reality of an action taking place, but on intent. As a DD person I view certain spankings as being given the same way they might have been used by a parent or teacher "in the old days". For me, these are "real" whether they produce tears or not.
What I am currently going through seems quite real to me and I think that as the days wear on, I will be fearing my daily morning and evening installments more and more. (And Rosa hasn't even threatened to wear a leather bustier!)