To see a full-size view of the images posted, just click on them.

RULES FOR POSTING COMMENTS: This blog is meant to be interactive. Please utilize the comment feature to respond to posts that prompt a reaction. You do not have to agree with me to post, but I do ask that your comment pertain to the post itself. I also ask that "anonymous" guests attach some sort of name to their comments so readers can tell everyone apart. (If you cannot follow these simple rules, your post may be DELETED or at the very least mocked for the entertainment of those who can respect my guidelines.)

Monday, June 3, 2019

Moishe the Tailor

The nuances being expressed this week on Dan’s excellent blog made me think of the old "Moishe the Tailor" joke where the protagonist bemoans the fact that he had admirably performed the duties of the village tailor for decades and yet was never referred to as "Moishe the Tailor"........

"...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.


  1. i would counter your example and say the other fellows your friend played with were meek rather than submissive.

    for us the safe sane consensual becomes a challenge regarding equality. by having the power to say no, and by having a discussion about what i agree to am i equal?

    we have worked out that when we do talk whether its just my wife or her friends to i am naked then they can see things excite me even if i say no.

    on the day to day side of things its not a quantitative thing. there is no i decided twice so flr is out today. it is an agreement between the two of us that where we differ she can choose

    it gets me out of the banal. what color sheet should we buy? i dont care im asleep
    what color should we paint the living room my opinion is sought it is just given less weight than my wifes opinion

    when i first talked to her about this kind of lifestyle (after she was done laughing then quizzing) she said that if we do things like this they will be real. she said if i spank you it will hurt. if i humiliate you its going to be awful for you

    when she said that i knew how lucky i was about to be living a submissive dream.

    i think how you end is appropriate. who leads. my wife. do we even need to consider a new car her call. let alone what color it may be

    1. Maybe because I never felt like this lifestyle was any sort of concession on Rosa's part, just a mutual desire, that I never bought into the whole, "you wanted this, so it's all up to me on how to do it. That's the condition of the deal." thing I see with a lot of couples.

      The way I see it, is she knows what the benefits of this lifestyle are for her and she is just as careful not to blow it as I am. I also have the wisdom that comes from painful past experience where I conceded way too much and was completely taken advantage of. NEVER AGAIN.

      As the "sub" I certainly concede more......but only what I am comfortable conceding.

  2. KD, as you know I have absolutely NO experience as a “dominant” beyond my own amateur forays into D/s in my marriage, so I don’t have any practical experience with varieties of submissives. But I think I can imagine how a woman might FEEL you were less submissive than other guys, even if you complied with every command and accepted every “punishment.” I like the fact that my husband isn’t very stoical about taking a spanking. He yelps and squirms and bucks in a way that shows me that he really feels it. You have much more experience than he does, so you would probably find the spankings I give him quite mild. That means you might not show as much response, even if I spanked you harder than would him. In that case, I think I might well FEEL you were “less submissive” even though you submitted fully. Maybe that’s what your play partner felt?

    I like your point about the undisclosed thoughts and motives of the tops in DD relationships. I’ve never really thought about that, but now that you mention it, I think it is true. I’ve had the experience of spanking my husband for a stated reason but taking pleasure in the spanking for a reason that might seem petty or unfair if I said it.

    1. Hi Danielle. I wouldn't go assuming my less-than-deferential image is due to OTK stoicism. LOL. One thing I used to (and still) tell potential spankers with no experience is that even without years of practice, when it comes to 'paddle vs. butt', even if it's a long battle for a while, 'butt' ALWAYS loses! ;-) Believe me, 100 years of experience doesn't change the physics and biology of that. I squirm and kick like anyone else. >blush<

      No I think it's demeanor. I tend to not be very fawning....even when in extremely humbling situations.

      As for secret motives, I've actually had Rosa begin to tell me what she had in her head to motivate a particular 'play spanking' and if she started to mention something problematic, I've politely stopped her and suggested she "do what she needs to......but don't tell me about it".I can become very accepting or extremely resistant to the same level of butt-whacking.....due solely to WHY it's happening. (You could say it's one of my quirks within this quirk)

  3. I agree defining what is and is not an FLR is basically an exercise in line drawing and personal viewpoints.

    I like your use of the word "meek," and it relates well to a discussion we had a couple of weeks ago on my blog when we tried to define the difference between submissive and servile, or something along those lines.

    While our relationship may not have been as mutual at the outset as yours at least in terms of timing, in that I did bring her the DD concept and she agreed to it, I agree that I don't think either of us would throw it away casually even if it doesn't always work perfectly. I was thinking of this today in terms of the comment I suspect is coming on my blog from someone about threatening divorce if her husband isn't perfectly compliant.

    1. And, btw, there is a great TED talk in which the speaker told an Iris version of that joke you lead with. But, instead of "But, suck just one cock . . ." it ended with, "But, fuck just one goat . . ." I truly about fell out of my chair laughing the first time I heard it.

    2. Yeah, I'm totally on-board with submissive service and accountability but not yet desirous of being assimilated by the DD equivalent of the Borg.

      I'm not sure I prefer the Irish version, but it could just be because it's not the version I heard first. Besides I've always associated the goat-thing with the Greeks. Sheep for the Scots. Hogs for rednecks, and chickens for those trying to cut down on red meat. ;-)