Did men really do this to their wives

I am on a few sites with US posters and corporal punishment in general towards children is seen as quite acceptable. Many think Europeans and their socialist liberal ideas are nuts.

I love The Quiet Man but me and my husband do pass a WTF look at the "here's a stick to beat the lovely lady with" clip.

I won't click on those religious sites - I'm in a good mood this morning.

From the WIKI. So a woman with a black eye was seen as a lovers quarrel and friends would try and help the couple patch things up.

Lucy and Ricky are reading a thriller novel together. Lucy gets really into it, acting out the argument parts. Fred and Ethel overhear Lucy from outside the Ricardos' door, and they think that Ricky and Lucy are having a huge fight, and that Ricky hit Lucy. Right before the Mertzes phone to come visit, Ricky tosses Lucy the book, and it hits her hard, giving her an instant black eye. When the Mertzes see that Lucy got a black eye, they think Ricky really was the one who gave her it.

The next morning, Ethel goes to see Lucy to get the true story of the black eye, still not buying the book story. Lucy decides to have fun with her, and she makes up a tale of how Ricky found out that she's in love with another man. Meanwhile, Fred wants to patch things up between the two falsely fighting lovebirds, so he sends Lucy some flowers that are supposedly from Ricky. But he signs the card with his own name!

When Ethel finds out that Lucy got flowers, she instantly thinks that they're a gift from the "other man." Lucy lets Ethel read the handwritten card, to show her that they've got to be from Ricky. Ethel sees Fred's handwriting and signature, and thinks that Fred is Lucy's lover! Ethel swats Fred with the box of flowers, and on the way out of the Ricardos' apartment, Fred meets Ricky in the hallway and slugs him for causing all this trouble.

The next day, Fred and Ethel go back to the Ricardos'. They now believe the true story that Lucy got her black eye from being tossed a book, because the same thing happened to Ethel the previous night. Now, all four of them have a black eye!

There were a few shows that made that "joke" if I remember op. The Honeymooners was particulary fucked up.

Also I think it was I love Lucy that had an episode where she had a black eye (not from Ricky) but everyone kept gossiping thinking it was him like it was a bit of fabulous gossip. Or did I make that up? Sure it happened.

The way Ricky treats and speaks to Lucy in general is disgusting. That way he has of saying "Lucy, Lucy...." in that amused patronising tone made me sit up a bit when I first saw it age 10. I think I just put it down to the show being dated.

Then there's Not Without My Daughter....

Goodness, there is some weird crap out there . I feel so sheltered in my little world of normality .

It is the aspect of pastors/ministers promoting/condoning it that is really disturbing to me.

Yes, Amethyst, that's the impression I have too from my brief reading of that website. The way they talk about the woman 'needing' the stress relief of the spanking and her tears giving her a respite from female 'guilt' sounds very much like sexual repression. The couple are using methods that are not overtly sexual (to them) to release pent-up frustration.

I guess if you can only have sex for procreation purposes and if the woman is not supposed to derive any pleasure from it, then I can well imagine that spankings provide her with the stimulation and release she needs. So no surprise she is 'begging' her strong manly husband for a bout of 'discipline' then...ugh...

On a more serious note, I have heard mention of spanking children much more here in the USA than I ever did in the UK. I have actually met a couple of parents here who are Christian and known to spank their children. They are in a home co-op preschool with one of my friends who does not share their values at all but who is 'live and let live' about it. I couldn't associate with people who have those values. It creeps me out.

MyEmpire - you're absolutely right. I knew I'd worded that post badly!

What I meant to say was, however it's dressed up, men who spank their wives do so because they (and possibly in some cases the wives) get off on it. But to admit that would be pervy and wrong in their world, so they have to pretend it's about something else.

There's a passage in one of the L.M.Montgomery Avonlea books where several of the older women are discussing a man they know of who spanks his wife and how awful it is, and how they'd rather be knocked down than put across their husband's knee and spanked (the implication being that their husbands don't do either).
That would be a bit later than turn-of-the-century, I think.

The thing is, there's so much else of that kind of thing out there - surrendered wives, the Quiverfull lot, and so on. If female oppression is your thing, there are lots of ways to do it that don't involve spanking. I reckon if you choose that particular branch of ultra-conservative Christianity, it's because you get off on spanking your wife.

I'm not planning on clicking the christian links btw!

There is a punishment theme with these groups - I know that as my neighbours are a bit that way and recommended we use "physical punishment" with the kids. They hit theirs on the hand with a wooden spoon though.

the bits pasted on here sound a mix of horrible abusive and pervy that's for sure.

Not impossible to imagine that the men in the groups who came up with these rules (and maybe some of the women too) are getting off on it though is it, even if not all of the people following the rules are.

The spanking cultural stuff is interesting!

Like I say my vague idea has been formed by what I've read, that was written by people out of the US. I am sure plenty of brits like a spanky time of it but the way it is in these stories and on telly seems a bit different somehow.

I wonder if spanking as a punishment for children is used more in the US - is quite a normal thing to do? It just feels like it's a sort of standard reference point which is totally alien to me.

And then of course plenty of people go on to fetishise stuff that happened when they were kids / or just find that they enjoy it anyway, irrespective!

I just hit the link to Christian discipline. I will never be able to unread it! AHHHH!

Ugh, I wish I had never clicked on that link either. That is one of the problems with the interwebz - there is such a prolific amount of ridiculous dross that you might never have come across, that we now have such easy access to .

Maybe the British spanking enthusiasts are just more furtive than their American couins

I don't think so. If anything, I think British enthusiasts are more honest about it, accepting the sexual nature of adult spanking, and separating it from abuse as long as both participants have equal right to give or withdraw consent. But even with consensual BDSM there can be the thrill of pretended force, of "No" not meaning "No".

But in the strait-laced world of ILL and CDD, BDSM is unacceptable, and has to be disguised or made excuse for.

I think that in many ways the Americans are more prudish than the British. They bring sex into issues in ways that would not occur to Brits, eg naked toddlers being shocking.

It sounds to me like it's soooo about sex - pure kink as a pp said. Almost a way for women to achieve orgasm, which presumably isn't the done thing in those marriages, like nuns self-flagelating.

I think it's abuse dressed up as religion.

BDSM is a choice, not a prescribed lifestyle.

But if a woman was being hit in the face everyday, it would still be illegal, whatever the woman said/thought.

Surely it would be illegal, in the uk at least, for anyone to actually carry out that stuff? It's assault!