I lifted this quote directly from the "maintenance" link the General provided:

My husband informed me this morning we were going to have a maintenance session this evening for the first time in months.
As I mentioned in a previous blog, I've been having a hard time keeping things in order. My husband thinks a maintenance session might help me get back on track. I have neglected my health as of late and have been a bit ill, followed by an exacerbation of fibromyalgia. I am behind on housework a bit (just a bit--I've been careful to keep that going). I'm behind on homeschooling. My husband calls these the three H's-- Health, House, Homeschooling. Letting these slide will get me in trouble faster than anything.

God, this is just down right sad. Seriously. This woman has a medical condition that causes pain and fatigue, thereby causing her to fall behind in a few things. Because of this her husband thinks she needs a FUCKING SPANKING!?!?!? And she also believes that she deserves it!?!? I have to say that I feel sorry for her. Someone this Christopathically detached from reality needs help, starting with leaving that sick sadistic fuck she calls a husband.

I'm glad she's blogging about this, just so the world can see how shitty some Christian conservatives can be. Still, it's just fucking sad to see a grown woman being treated like a child. The fact that she has a debilitating illness only increases the problem exponentially, IMHO. But whether her fibromyalgia is mild or severe, and whether the spankings are mild or rough, NO woman deserves that kind of treatment, even if she thinks it's okay. I mean, WTF!?

Compared to what's going on in Iraq I guess this is nothing, but it still makes me sick. Jesus, that's so fucked up.
John Lucid | Homepage | 05.11.07 - 11:44 pm | #

I think I pooped.
Whining Infant | Homepage | 05.11.07 - 11:50 pm | #

Where do the crotches from crotchless pantaloons go when they're snipped? Or aborted. Or (gasp) never even got to be sewn. Imagine the horror of prophylactic crotchless pantaloons, then get back to me. Oh, you'll get spanked for thinking about such things, but that's part of the fun.

Praise Jesus the woman only suffers from fibromyalgia. If she had lupus I believe the Christian thing to do is burn her heels off with a torch. God is great!

+++
mjs | Homepage | 05.12.07 - 12:30 am | #

General, Sir!

I'm pleased to report that it was only the non-fiction sales that went up. The troops are serious-minded indeed!

But perhaps too serious? All work and no play may cause even the Lord's finest General to make small errors. Maybe you could call up that commander of the local Christian militia. Ask him to use his mighty rod of correction to help you work through your penance, and then celebrate your redemption with one of those traditional wrestling matches you enjoy so much. Treat yourself -- you deserve it.

With a soaking wet gown clinging to her trembling frame,
elendil | Homepage | 05.12.07 - 1:23 am | #

Or you could join the same class as Rev Haggard did to spiff up his heterosexual quotient (not that I am implying that there is anything unmannly about all the obsessing I see on this topic). Plus the writer states that your name is somehow to blame for your 'warped understanding' of "Christian Discipline".

Oh well, I digress and it's late. I agree that the woman is pathetic but at some point you've got to stand up and fight back (even if you're wearing crotchless pantaloons).
Linda | 05.12.07 - 2:12 am | #

糖尿病 高血压 高血脂
tgasd | Homepage | 05.12.07 - 4:13 am | #

To think that this whole Domestic Discipline stuff is somehow a Christian conservative thing is simply ridiculous.Try the website called Taken In Hand, whose owner says she is a feminist. A lot of contributors to Taken In Hand first brag about how they are indepent strong career wymyn, then proceed to discuss the whippings they get from their husbands and how much they enjoy them.
How do you know this Leah Kelley is a victim???? Has the thought ever crossed your mind that she probably enjoys it?
For the record, I don't practise any such thing in my marriage, but as a woman, I am insulted by liberals'constant portrayal of women who disagree with them as victims. Have you ever studied logic? A woman can't be equal to men in everything, as you believe, and on the other hand, a victim of patriarchal abuse.
Have you nothing else to do but blog about this poor woman? She is entitled to free speech just as anyone of you.
none | 05.12.07 - 5:09 am | #

General, Sir:

My inner frenchman says that this poor woman is in need of a pagan intervention. He also says that we are, in a sense, picking on her. Otoh, he knows that ignoring these fucking nutjobs is done at our own peril (see Bush 00, Bush 04).

Having read the post about the Seattle Police Chief I wonder; could these two be a match made by heaven on Hannidate?
democommie™™™™®© | 05.12.07 - 6:37 am | #

More wit and wisdom from the CDD blog....


"...For the LDD couple spanking to tears is a must, to help humble and contrite her and allows her to feel truly disciplined.
When spanking it is not necessary to use more force to bring her to tears, just to be repetitive, along with the verbal scolding is usually enough to start the tears flowing in a submissive woman.
Most new LDD tend to either stop when the woman starts to cry or never bring her to tears, you need to push past the point and bring her to tears for with that comes the release she desires.

For new HOH, it takes alot of love and emotional strength in order to punish his wife properly and bring her to tears, unless you are a sadist, it can be very difficult on the man. Men are told not to hurt woman physically from young man to adulthood, hence the problem.
By bring your woman to tears you allow her to release all the stress that has built up since her last punishment, and free her to show her submission to you.
The tears are also a great indicator that your wife has been punished properly, helping to end her stubbornness and feminine defiance to her HOH, bring out the more positive, sweeter submission she will feel.

Many women will admit, if only to themselves, that when spanked to tears they feel relief and love, knowing that their HOH is willing and strong enough to hold them accountable for their actions. When a woman admits this she is also admitting that she respects her HOH, and his decisions, that when she is punished it is never out of anger but out of love and the responsibility that her HOH is in charge.

Tears from actually being spanked at first are tears of pain and are quite natural, the second set of tears come from the humiliation and humbling effect that occurs when she submits to the punishment.
Some women will start to cry even before the spanking begins, because she realizes that she is to be punished and is sorry for her actions and the pain that is sure to follow. When a woman just starts to cry when spanked doesn't mean to stop because you see tears, you would not stop baking a cake when it starts to rise, No this means that the spanking is starting to have the desired effect providing the disciplinary value and corrective behavior that she needs.

All women are not the same, some women can take a lot while others will cry with hardly an effort. Remember that she is not in charge but the man is, and with him lies the amount of discipline that will be effected upon her bare backside, if the man allows his wife to stop the spanking he is not in charge and the respect she desires and needs will be lost, make sure to follow through giving her a painful enough spanking to bring her tears and allow them to flow freely, she will remember that you are the HOH.

Tears allow her feminine side to come out and breaks down her resistance, shame from being in a vulnerable position, naked over her HOH's lap, being soundly spanked. It is vital to continue the spanking when you notice her tears, and not to stop before the punishment has the desired effect.

Remember that the spanking is part of her submission and when she submits to such an obviously painful and humbling experience she will behave better and you will see a that her attitude towards you as her HOH is greatly improved, not because she is fearful of the spanking but out of respect and the knowledge that you will protect her at all times even from herself and her actions...."

WTF!!.......
not cletis | 05.12.07 - 7:54 am | #

Hello General,

I have watched your blog entries and the subsequent comments concerning my web site with no small amount of humor over the past couple of days, but now I truly feel I have to step in and set the record straight. My husband is NOT a monster. He is a loving husband and companion who treats me like a queen.

In some CDD marriages, the husband brought the concept to the wife, but in most, I daresay, the wife was the one who approached her husband with the need for discipline. I was one of the latter. My husband is a perfect gentleman and was raised never to hurt a woman, but he understood the need in me for discipline and agreed to implement CDD AT MY REQUEST.

Furthermore, he has never disciplined me when I was in pain or not feeling well from my fibromyalgia, and he has never held me accountable for housework or anything else during those occasions. He is very understanding and supportive about my disease.

The maintenance session described in the blog you quoted happened after the exacerbation resolved, and the problems with the housework and homeschooling had nothing to do with the disease process and everything to do with my being distracted by the less important things in life. Hence, the refocusing.

You may laugh and poke at me as you will. I have been doing this long enough to develop a rather warped sense of humor, and I am well aware that folks outside of domestic discipline circles do not understand those of us who CHOOSE it as a lifestyle. However, I ask that you please leave my husband out of it.

Blessings,
Leah Kelley
Leah Kelley | Homepage | 05.12.07 - 9:40 am | #

Dear General Sir, you warped bastard. We must remember that the woman in a proper christain mairrage is actully wedded to Jesus, so until Jesus finds the time to return , and hopefully with one sweet ass silicon spatula, I guess the man will have to fill in as some sort of living dildo or some thing like it.
Capt. Bat Guano | 05.12.07 - 11:06 am | #

I read a lot of the CDD blog.
What don't we understand about "consenting adults" here?
This isn't about wife beating. Wife beating is surely not "consenting adults".
She want to be disciplined. She took the lead to establish it in her relationship, according to her own writings.
The blog is about herself. She writes about her consenting adult relationship with her husband, spatulas, hero worship and submissiveness, and wrapped up in God stuff.
In my view Libruls should be respectful of the diversity represented by Mrs. Kelly's blog and books, not to overmention the "consenting adults" aspects.
CTheGee | 05.12.07 - 11:18 am | #

where did Leah's response comment go?
Haloscan or cleansing?
CTheGee | 05.12.07 - 11:49 am | #

Cleansing? My ass should be paddled for suggesting such nonsense. Silicone my General?

what ever one's choice... I consent.
CTheGee | 05.12.07 - 11:56 am | #

mrscplklyde loves the crotchless pantaloons I bought her for mothers day thank you very much.

That said my inner Frenchmen thinks there is something slightly phony about this entire thing.
cplklyde | 05.12.07 - 12:17 pm | #

CTheGee, yes it's consensual, but like I said, I'm not sure there is a lot of free will involved in some of these relationships. Do I advocate the criminaslization of consensual relationships? Hell no, but I understand that there's also a cost involved when you err on the side of liberty--there's nothing wrong with recognizing that. And certainly, the benefits to society such liberties bring outweigh that cost.

Listening to Green Day "Are we te Waiting" American Idiot has to be one of the greatest albums of all time. not a bad song on it.
patriotboy | Homepage | 05.12.07 - 3:57 pm | #

Wow. In The Eugene Weekly, there's been a big uproar about including Dan Savage's sex advice column because it's pretty raw and the kids can easily get their hands on the Weekly even though it's an "alternative" publication. Anyhow, the whole thing's kind of settled down, but I have to say, I do think that our friend Leah does seem to be into the old discipline and bondage thing. It's certainly between her and her husband, but I rather think she should leave religion out of it. There are those of us who make it to church every Sunday without the thought of indulging in such practices ever appealing in the slightest.

And another thing: I suggest you get the sexual fantasies regarding the kids right out of your mind, Leah. Like I said, Dan Savage is pretty raw, and he's much more secular than you, but he definitely has principles, and leaving kids out of the adults' sexual fantasies is one of them.
Delia | 05.12.07 - 7:49 pm | #

Plus, I think all these fine conservatives should realize that having the right to do something in private doesn't automatically mean you get respect from the rest of us for doing so. Nor are you exempt from criticism, especially if you are particularly idiotic.
Sarah | 05.12.07 - 7:53 pm | #

Leah, isn't it funny that you think others should submit to your "lifestyle" too?

Hey, if you want to be willingly abused by your sick fuck of a husband, go for it. However, don't expect the rest of us to follow along.

I have read the "advice" you have given to other women via Yahoo! Answers, and it's obviously you lack respect for women as a whole, especially yourself.

Say, how's your friend and her son Jihad doing?
Sarah | 05.12.07 - 8:02 pm | #

"I am insulted by liberals'constant portrayal of women who disagree with them as victims."

I apologize. I will never portray domestic abuse victims as helpless again!



"Have you ever studied logic?"

It's obvious you skipped class a few times.


"A woman can't be equal to men in everything, as you believe, and on the other hand, a victim of patriarchal abuse."

Heh. In other words, abuse is acceptable, no matter what the situation. I like you definitely of "equality."


"Have you nothing else to do but blog about this poor woman? She is entitled to free speech just as anyone of you."

Of course she has the right to free speech - which opens up my right to pity and ridicule her.
Sarah | 05.12.07 - 8:05 pm | #

Leah, for the sake of argument I will take most everything you say at face value. I will assume that your husband never spanks you when your fibromyalgia is acting up. I will even go so far as to say that his spankings aren't painful. That's about the most charitable interpretation of this method that I can imagine. Still, that makes his spankings all about humiliation. To me that is still warped. Yes, I know that statement might put me at odds with some liberals who are into BDSM, but I don't care. When you love and care about someone I think humiliation is the last thing you want to cause them.

Just because you freely and willingly consent to this humiliation doesn't mean that there's nothing wrong with it. Maybe nothing illegal is happening, but something psychologically damaging is taking place, IMHO.

One more thing: If you're going to ask us to leave your husband out of it, then you shouldn't mention him at all in the first place. It's YOUR blog, and you freely chose to write about him, thus exposing his behavior (and yours) to the whole world. Don't ask anyone to suspend judgment when you're making your actions known to the general public. No one is threatening you or your family; we're simply expressing our opinions about what you wrote. If you don't like this then maybe you shouldn't blog about it.
John Lucid | Homepage | 05.12.07 - 8:45 pm | #

Well, I think Leah is into plain 'ole S and M fantasy role playing and maybe she doesn't really know it. But as BDSM her ideas aren't very good, because one of the main things in BDSM is that the "sub" is ALWAYS in control and can make it stop using a "safe" word or such. This is essential in the BDSM world. Leah insists that the wife is NOT in control of the spanking, cannot decide when it starts, when it stops, or its severity. This is VERY dangerous. She is role playing 24/7, some people do, but she does not have the safeguards in place. This is just awful and she should not be advising other people interested in exploring this lifestyle. She has it all wrong.

Somebody mentioned Dan Savage: I think she needs to have a conversation with him. He'd love to take this apart on his blog, too. Somebody want to drop him a line?
tina | 05.12.07 - 9:14 pm | #

My theory on this is that Leah's husband is going to wake up to find himself with the muzzle of a .357 in his mouth and Leah's finger on the trigger.

But that's just me.
watertiger | Homepage | 05.12.07 - 11:07 pm | #

There are plenty of people in this twisted world of our who _do_ enjoy some good old-fashioned discipline from time to time. Personally, I think it's weird to bring religion into it, but whatever.
Mike Crichton | Homepage | 05.13.07 - 2:23 am | #

You know, even lifestyle Victorian dominants acknowledge that society has to be free and liberal enough to accept their particular contracts with submissives, as part of the necessary consents that keep them out of prison.

I guess what gets me is the hypocrisy. Women have to have enough rights in order to effectively cede them at the household door, and the decades-long educational work and the self-policing of the S/M community has to exist, in order for these patriarchal communities fronted by willing female stooges to have the excuse to administer punishment on unwilling family members.

I really don't care if a man and wife choose to have spanking as part of their communication resources, but it's damn dicey involving the kids in the same orbit of bare-bottomed spankings, punishment, and boundary erasure. What standing does a mother have, when Father can spank her and the kids know about it? The same standing that a teen girl has when invited into her father's bedroom, with her mother's tacit consent. Again, too much power, too many boundaries being crossed, and too many Bible quotes, to justify it.
cgeye | 05.13.07 - 3:04 am | #

And I'm not saying that incest is part of any story on the CDD website or blog; I'm just saying that when we give a head of the household that much power, in Jesus' name, that he will take advantage, because if a man's weak enough to hit someone weaker than himself, he can get on the path to worse abuse.
cgeye | 05.13.07 - 3:37 am | #

This woman has a major case of Dawn Eden syndrome. "I like kink so therefore every woman desperately needs this in order to feel loved and feminine and... uh... let me completely twist this Bible verse to justify it."

There's nothing wrong with liking sex a little rough. There is something wrong with being so psychologically/emotionally immature that you need someone to spank you everytime you forget to vaccuum in order to feel loved. And there is definitely something wrong with assuming that everyone else with your anatomy feels the same way, or that you're a Real Woman and women who don't need to be humiliated to feel loved aren't. And there is something really, really wrong with interpreting Ephesians as "men should regularly beat their wives in order to keep them feeling submissive." Stop viewing your husband as your father and stop assuming you represent all women.
Rosasharn | 05.13.07 - 5:51 am | #

I place my hand on my magick wand and swear I thought that sample chapter was a parody. Now that it appears that Sister Leah is taking her jollies to a wide public for perusal, I'd just like to ask her who she thinks is reading the stuff?

One thinks immediately of some "nice Christian husband" who gets an eyeful of Leah's purple prose and sets off to bash his wife to a pulp as is his right as HOH.

I've never been prouder to be a Pagan than I am at this moment. No women will be harmed by reading my blog. Heck, they won't even have to weed the garden anymore!
anne johnson | Homepage | 05.13.07 - 7:32 am | #

I value fairness.
I would not tolerate this kind of relationship.
bethiris | 05.13.07 - 12:27 pm | #

Sounds like a typical S&M contract to me. The wife has just put it in Biblical terms. That is probably more erotic for the good Christian couple. Really, I do not think there is anything particularly strange about the story other than the fact that the wife wants to advertise their special arrangement to the world, write S&M fiction with a Christian twist, and sell bizarre night-wear. Nothing to see here, move along.
f00bar jones | 05.13.07 - 4:37 pm | #

f00bar's right. She's probably making a ton of money off this sh*t.
itwasntme | 05.14.07 - 3:31 am | #

Sarah, I am going to explain this to you again, since you seem to be a bit slow.
Leah, in her own words, is NOT a victim of domestic abuse, contrary to what some of the commenters wrote.
I never said domestic abuse didn't exist at all, so don't twist my words. You can disagree with her life style as much as you wish, don't turn her and other women who seem to enjoy this stuff into victims. And don't pretend that this life style is a special Christian conservative thing because it is NOT.
none | 05.14.07 - 7:32 am | #

BTW, during my classes I was taught logic, not hysterics and it's evident to me that some people can't quite think clearly when the word "abuse" is ever mentioned. My version of equality says that there are men who are abusive and there are women who are abusive. I don't believe in "all women are always victims of everything" stuff.
Anyway, as I said, it's quite clear to anyone who has taken time to read those soft versions of Marquis de Sade' stories which Mrs Kelly posts on her website, that she is NOT an abuse victim, but rather enjoys the whole thing.
Now you can abuse me behind my back as much as you wish since I have a lot of other things to do besides discussing naughty fiction, so I'm not planning to participate in this discussion any more.
But you guys seriously lack the sense of humour - my, I wish I could write something like this and earn on it, too!
none | 05.14.07 - 8:49 am | #

ummm, it is really confusing watching two satire blogs fight.

when your "inner frenchman" steps in; it just goes all postmodern and confusing.
kiche | 05.14.07 - 10:06 am | #

But is is a "special Christian conservative thing" to claim that liking role play and spanking is part of a cultural trend as natural as homeschooling, keeping one's hair long, and defying all the laws and Constitutional amendments one doesn't like, if they interfere with the HOH's right to do as he likes, when he likes.

She has the right to keep her kid away from those nasty Girl Scout adults, because she does not like them, but she implies that they are heathen abortionist lesbos, and that the composition of the GSUSA would be vastly improved if women like her were leaders -- women who would, if they could, teach their Brownies and Juniors the importance of having a father or father figure spank them on a regular basis. S/M practitioners, at the very least, don't want to tell lies to kids about sex and consent. In fact, they know better than to talk to kids at all about sex, knowing it's a job for parents.

It's not the kink, it's the universalization of fascist tendencies that imagine American women should turn back over a century of progress, and submit that way as part of their marital duties.
cgeye | 05.14.07 - 11:31 am | #

But is she hot ?
Doug Watts | Homepage | 05.14.07 - 1:30 pm | #

If the woman had any self-respect, she'd stab her husband in the heart while he was sleeping with the rustiest knife in the kitchen.
Paul | 05.14.07 - 2:10 pm | #

I can understand wanting something like this, and personally I think the comments and points from "none" are a little trivial. But it sounds to me that this woman's reasoning behind this is the same "type" of justification of need that you hear from women that suffer from domestic violence, either at some point or all of their life - "No, I deserve it", "he only gave me what I had coming", etc. It also kind of reminds me of the whole right-wing/catholic style madonna/whore complex, where there are men going out and doing immoral things in the course of their powered life, then going to a dominatrix to get their choice of physical, personal absolution for being a bad boy (no repentance necessary).
This all or none stuff is bs, on any side, there are exceptions to every rule. People who are into S&M should be free to follow it, but absolute submission (especially involving any children) and then further tagging it with a religious-duty connotation of any kind is wrong. If that's what you choose, so be it, that's your freedom; but if you'd have people allow you this, stay out of their lives and don't try to push or advocate this on others unless they ask. Like someone else said above - don't publish what you don't want criticized, that's the unwritten yang to the freedom of the press.

Man, the comment above mine is just hilarious, tho...If'n ya gots a sense a humor.
isitme? | 05.14.07 - 5:27 pm | #

I think the comments about how the woman raises her children are off-point. Her site and CDD was originally brought to everyone's attention because of the strange Christian bondage themes. I think we can all agree that there is nothing particularly unusual about this type of behavior considering that many people practice some type of consensual BDSM in their relationships whether it be something as minor as candle wax or something as "bizarre" as whips and chains.

Is she a right-wing nutjob? Probably. Is that newsworthy? No. Focus on the politicians, and the major hypocrites in the media and on the web. Leave the personal lives of people out of it. Otherwise, you just come off as sounding small-minded and mean. As for her children, there is nothing we can do about the lady indoctrinating her children with religious or political beliefs that we do not agree with. Furthermore, we would live in a truly frightening world if that were not the case.

Focus on the problem, not the people (unless the people are part of the problem - but then the focus should be on policy makers and major players - not minor league nuts).

My major beef with the follow-up post to this story by Jesus' General was that it was totally presumptuous and condescending.

Finally, some of the follow-up comments make it sound like this lady is going mainstream or somehow her viewpoint is endemic of the larger societal problems facing the U.S. Please. She is smalltime, and would have otherwise remained a complete unknown had she not been singled out by this website.
f00bar jones | 05.14.07 - 9:10 pm | #

Leah,

DUMP HIM NOW!!
gayle | 05.14.07 - 9:44 pm | #

none: To quote from your condescending admonition to Sarah, "I am going to explain this to you, since you seem to be a bit slow."

A woman who not only derives sexual gratification but grants the same to a man by willingly being beaten, humiliated, and treated like a child, as Leah clearly does, is submitting to the odious construct that women are less than human. Color it with pseudo-"Christian" directive if you please; it's still degrading behavior designed to portray one partner as dominator and one as submissive receptacle for abuse. I am so sorry to inform you, but a man whipping a woman is abuse. It matters not if she gets off on it. That merely indicates the degree to which she is so psychologically fucked up that she actually considers it acceptable.

If I subscribed to god-baggedness, which, possessing a brain, I do not, I would point out the obvious conclusion that this is not something that Jesus would do.

I mean, please. Assuming this is not someone's fucked-up idea of satire (and I'm still not sure it's not), if you for whatever warped reasons of your own feel compelled to defend violence against and degradation of a fellow human being, at least have the decency to admit you're sexual deviants and leave Christ out of it, for crissakes. Sheesh already!
`
MzNicky | 05.14.07 - 10:23 pm | #

MzNicky: Every member of the BDSM community would disagree with you.

Your argument is also very confused. You are not a Christian, but if you were, you would denounce this relationship as being non-Christian like? You can't even get Christians to agree on basic precepts of their faith, so why do you expect them to agree on what is moral in terms of someone's sexual and domestic life? Really, just leave religion out of this.

>> A woman who not only derives sexual
>> gratification but grants the same
>> to a man by willingly being beaten,
>> humiliated, and treated like a
>> child, as Leah clearly does, is
>> submitting to the odious construct
>> that women are less than human.

The keyword here is submitting. She chooses this lifestyle. No one thrust it upon her. Denying her the lifestyle of her choice is counter to progressive ideals. She is obviously not harming others with this behavior. Or are you ready to relinquish your right to live your life as you see fit and submit to the moral compass of another?

>> I am so sorry to inform you, but a
>> man whipping a woman is abuse. It
>> matters not if she gets off on it.

How is providing for the happiness of another abuse? She wants to be spanked. You can mouth off about how fucked up she is all you want but that is because you find the behavior objectionable. You are making the same fallacious argument of the religious right. Behavior X is wrong and objectionable to me therefore everyone should abstain from it. I am sorry, that is not how liberty works.

>> if you for whatever warped reasons
>> of your own feel compelled to
>> defend violence against and
>> degradation of a fellow human being

That argument is a total straw man. No one is defending violence against another human. You cannot commit a true act of violence in the context of a BDSM relationship. The victim of violence, by its very definition, cannot consent to the act.

This woman is not in an abusive relationship. She does not fear her husband. She looks forward to her "maintenance" session like we look forward to the weekend. It couldn't be anymore obvious.
f00bar jones | 05.14.07 - 10:44 pm | #

f00bar jones:
Every member of the "BDSM community" can disagree with me if they like. I couldn't care less.

One does not have to be a Christian to understand Christian beliefs. And I'm not the one who brought Christianity into it in the first place. That's Leah's groove. She claims that she "submits" to her abuse because the Bible tells her so. If she wants to be a masochist misogynist, then that's her self-loathing choice, but she doesn't need to be telling other women it's their godly duty, for fuck's sake. That, I would suggest, is indeed "harming others."

"Providing happiness for others" by offering herself up as a wayward naughty child for physical assault? Uh, sorry, dude, that's just some fucked-up shit. Please acquaint yourself with the fact that, even in this 21st-century godbag USA of ours, women have been considered grownups, sort of, for nearly 90 whole years now! That means men no longer get to assume that women exist solely as depositories for whatever happy horseshit sadism they deem appropriate! Theoretically, anyway, until coprophiliacs like Leah pop up to assert themselves as pathetic puppets of the patriarchy and pervs like you embrace them as subversive sexual champions.

"No one is defending violence against another human being"? Huh. Sounds to me like you are. That's what I consider one person beating another to be: violence. Please explain to me the sexiness in it; my "moral compass" must be malfunctioning.
`
MzNicky | 05.14.07 - 11:40 pm | #

Thank you, Sister Nicky.

HelloScum hasn't been working worth a shit for me this week, but I would encourage all of those who are thinking with their LITTLE heads to go over to the "Screw HaloScan" comments, 'cause they just flat-out refuse to fucking GET IT.

Grow up, kids, and get your head out of your ass and your hand out of your crotch and realize that we are talking about brainwashing and fucking ABUSE, and a woman who is aiding and abetting the wife-beaters by encouraging other women to SUBMIT to the same abuse.

Either you fucking get it or you don't, and I gotta say, I'm pretty fucking disappointed by the numbers of people around here who DON'T FUCKING GET IT.
Anntichrist S. Coulter | Homepage | 05.14.07 - 11:50 pm | #

MzNicky:

>> If she wants to be a masochist
>> misogynist, then that's her
>> self-loathing choice,

Exactly.

>> but she doesn't need to be telling
>> other women it's their godly duty

She can advocate whatever she wants. What exactly is your problem here? Her formal position is that CDD should only be practiced when both sides consent. She isn't advocating domestic abuse against women, and states the same on her website. If a women wishes to subject herself to this kind of relationship, she has the right to.

>> That, I would suggest, is indeed
>> "harming others."

You know what. I agree. Let's lock her up. Matter of fact, let's lock up everyone who disagrees with MzNicky.

>> "Providing happiness for others" by
>> offering herself up as a wayward
>> naughty child for physical assault?

*sigh* You just don't get it, do you? My statement wasn't about the husband being made happy. It was about her being made happy. Everything on her site suggests that she enjoys this relationship. Hell, she created a site that advocates this type of relationship as spiritually healthy and in complete accordance with her religious beliefs. She clearly, in her own "fucked-up" way, benefits and derives happiness from this arrangement.

>> Theoretically, anyway, until
>> coprophiliacs like Leah pop up to
>> assert themselves as pathetic
>> puppets of the patriarchy and pervs
>> like you embrace them as subversive
>> sexual champions.

Put the thesaurus down and come back to reality. First, the label of "perv" is inappropriate and not even the point as I have stated no official position on CDD. She chooses this lifestyle. Either you believe that everyone has the right to live life as they see fit or you don't. Please, choose one and let me know your answer. Keep in mind that this relationship is A) consensual, and B) does not harm anyone around her. Please also refrain from dreaming up and assuming details of her life that you are not privy to.

>> That's what I consider one person
>> beating another to be: violence.

Again. It is not violence in the framework of a BDSM relationship. IANAL, but I think she would have a hard time, especially after writing fiction glorifying the CDD lifestyle, proving in a court of law that she was abused or the victim of violence. Let me repeat again, if you consent to being spanked in order to derive some "perverted" pleasure out of it, it is not an act of violence.

>> Please explain to me the sexiness
>> in it; my "moral compass" must be
>> malfunctioning.

I don't find it sexy at all but then again I'm not advocating the behavior. Maybe you should ask Leah about it or read up on some of her erotic fiction. I am simply defending her right to live life free from people like you.

You cannot just assume that she is in an abusive relationship and make that the foundation of your argument. You do not know anything about her, her husband, or how they live in private outside of the details she exposes through her CDD website and personal blog. Last time I checked, women in abusive relationships do not advocate getting hit in the face with a wrench to others. They do not blog, with great anticipation, about the next beating from their husband. You either argue that, A) she should not be allowed to practice or advocate a BDSM-ish relationship because you personally find it unacceptable (i.e. you don't care for liberty or free speech) or, B) she has the right to live her life as she sees fit provided that she breaks no law (i.e. does not harm another in her actions).
f00bar jones | 05.15.07 - 12:12 am | #

f00bar: You may not be advocating consensual violence, but you're working awfully hard at defending it. Just a liberty-and-free-speech kinda guy at heart, huh?

She can "advocate" anything she wants, yes. Racists can advocate violence toward people of color. Warmongers can advocate torture. Others can pour out of the woodwork to defend them with bogus claims of liberty and free speech too, and throw in random Biblical passages to support their idiocy, and they do. And we have the right to ridicule and question them if we like. What's your problem with that?

What you don't get is that by putting her sadomasochistic porn fantasies on a blog and thereby proposing that it's a Christian woman's duty to be flogged by her husband until she's bloody and whimpering because she didn't get the table set on time or whatever, Leah is doing great harm. Feel free to go fuck yourself, or educate yourself. Preferably both, in that order.
`
MzNicky | 05.15.07 - 12:43 am | #

MzNicky:

>> She can "advocate" anything she
>> wants, yes. Racists can advocate
>> violence toward people of color.

My oh my, we have come full circle. Again, racists who advocate violence may be breaking the law (IANAL, but certainly in some cases this is illegal - perhaps depending on the specificity of the threat). However, as clearly stated on her site, she only advocates CDD between consenting adults. So, how is your analogy relevant again? It isn't. Just another red herring. To extrapolate your argument, everyone who enjoys BDSM and advocates that lifestyle is now on the same level of a racist who advocates violence. Please correct me if I am wrong, but that is what you are saying, correct?

>> Others can pour out of the woodwork
>> to defend them with bogus claims of
>> liberty and free speech too,

I would never defend someone who advocated violence against another. It is clear in this case that the woman is not advocating violence against other women anymore than she is advocating violence against herself. She is simply saying that if CDD sounds like something you would enjoy, by all means hop on board.

>> And we have the right to ridicule
>> and question them if we like.

You most certainly do. But you do not have the right to speak for this woman or her situation as if your word is truth and her word is false. To claim that she is the victim of abuse on her behalf is presumptuous and condescending, which is the major beef I have with this whole non-story.

>> What you don't get is that by
>> putting her sadomasochistic porn
>> fantasies on a blog and thereby
>> proposing that it's a Christian
>> woman's duty to be flogged by her
>> husband until she's bloody and
>> whimpering because she didn't get
>> the table set on time or whatever,
>> Leah is doing great harm.

No, she isn't. No one is being harmed by this woman's act of free speech. She has the right to speak her mind honestly just as we have the right to listen and reject or accept what she says. That is what it means to honor free speech and liberty. You think you can just arbitrarily draw the line wherever you see fit. Every tyrant and bigot believes the same. If this woman believes CDD is spiritual, and healthy, then by God let her sing it from the mountaintops for all I care. She will have a hard time getting other women to join her in her cause as, well, CDD is just a little too bizarre for most women to truly appreciate.
f00bar jones | 05.15.07 - 1:00 am | #

Let me conclude my argument for the night as it is getting late.

It is obvious to me that no one here truly believes that this woman is the victim of domestic abuse. Why? Because none of you are going to contact the proper authorities. You don't even take your own position seriously, so why should I? You really think she is the victim of domestic abuse, or that she is advocating violence? Well, contact the authorities because that is the right thing to do. Otherwise, just admit that your only beef with her is that she is a Christian who advocates a lifestyle you disagree with. Show me evidence that she is abusing children, or other women and I will gladly admit that I have made a mistake.

The original post, and the follow-up were simply mean spirited attacks on some random individual due to a personal lifestyle decision that you happened to disagree with. Jesus' General went as far as to say, "I'm not sure whether to pity Leah or to hold her in contempt." and "her husband is a monster". Wow. How paternalistic, how self-righteous, how presumptuous do you have to be to stake out this ridiculous position on absolutely no evidence.

There is no doubt in my mind that this individual would never have solicited any attention at all if it were not for the fact that she practiced BDSM with a Christian bent. The whole episode is disgraceful and I hope for a public retraction from Jesus' General, although I admit that is unlikely to happen.

MzNicky, Antichrist-coulter, feel free to respond. I would ask that you try to avoid the ad hominem attacks (like, "go fuck yourself") though, I grow wearisome of parsing through arguments that are 90% vitriol, mis characterizations, and hyperbole to find that one statement that adequately describes your absurd position.

Thanks and goodnight.
f00bar jones | 05.15.07 - 3:26 am | #

foobar: I would ask you to take your excessively overwrought BDSM apologias and shove them up your wearisome ass. There. I felt free to respond. Thanks so ever much.
`
MzNicky | 05.15.07 - 7:41 am | #

Okay MzNicky - what about my situation? Two gay males involved in spanking, by turns dominant and submissive. Is that okay? If it is, how is it any different to what Leah does apart from your (unasked for by her) sanctification of her as a "woman". People enjoy BDSM, just like some people enjoy smearing themselves in chocolate sauce and having their partner lick it off. You're all uptight because Leah - as a consenting adult - has decided she would like to play-act being a submissive woman - which, as a liberated woman capable of making up her own mind is exactly what she should be allowed to do. Please get down off that feminist high horse before you fall off (horse-riding is intended for men, obviously, otherwise God would have made horses with humps to accomodate women's dresses).
niloc | 05.15.07 - 10:20 am | #

Okay. One last time. "Leah" is putting forth S&M, in which of course the woman is the M, in terms of Godly dictate. In other words, she's telling Christian women who come to her site that it's their Christly duty to allow their husbands to beat them, dominate them, and basically treat them any ol' way they please, because that's what "God commands." If she wants to write pervo porn and spread it throughout the land, fuck if I care. But when she perpetuates the violent oppression of women by tying it into Christianity, she's doing harm, and that I care about. Okay? Everyone got it now? Go beat each other to a pulp, if that's what gets you off. Again, fuck if I care. Just quit acting like this person is at the forefront of Christian women's liberation or whatever, and trying to pick fights with anyone who calls it what it is, i.e., old-fashioned sexist abuse all dressed up in its Sunday best, to defend your own sexual practices.
`
MzNicky | 05.15.07 - 11:29 am | #

MzNicky, keep fighting the good fight, honey. We all need you to protect us from the CDD epidemic that is sweeping this nation. Wait, what? There is no such epidemic? Wait, grown women are capable of thinking for themselves and don't need you to defend them? Wait, no one is forcing anyone to live a CDD lifestyle? I guess this really is a non-story then.

>> But when she perpetuates the
>> violent oppression of women by
>> tying it into Christianity, she's
>> doing harm

You haven't proved that she is harming anyone anymore that you have proved that she is the victim of abuse.

>> Just quit acting like this person
>> is at the forefront of Christian
>> women's liberation or whatever,

How are we blowing this out of proportion? We did not choose to highlight it on the site. We did not, with great moral outrage, call her husband a monster and question her sanity. You are the one pretending that she is at the forefront of some movement or that her case is indicative of a larger societal ill.

You have no evidence. You just wish it were so. She is not being abused. She is not harming others by advocating her lifestyle. Until you have proof otherwise, you might want to refrain from making outrageous claims.
f00bar jones | 05.15.07 - 11:55 am | #

Foobar, grow the fuck up and go shuck and jive your misogynist bullshit elsewhere.

You're not a "progressive," you're a regressive and a fucktard to boot.
Anntichrist S. Coulter | Homepage | 05.15.07 - 12:34 pm | #

>> Foobar, grow the fuck up and go
>> shuck and jive your misogynist
>> bullshit elsewhere.

So I suppose this means you will be contacting the appropriate authorities, right? I mean, you would not want this woman to suffer in her obviously abusive relationship. I doubt someone as full of compassion as you obviously are would find publicly ridiculing the victim of domestic abuse an activity worthy of your leisure time.

>>You're not a "progressive," you're a
>> regressive and a fucktard to boot.

Care to back that up with anything other than a personal attack? How is burning this woman and her husband at the stake of your value system progressive?

You do not like the way she lives. Fine, call it for what it is. Stop trying to hide behind emotionally charged words such as abuse, misogyny, sexism, and violence. You have no evidence to support any of those accusations.
f00bar jones | 05.15.07 - 1:10 pm | #

foobar: Quit being such a douchebag.

Go on now, shoo! Time for you to scurry back to the First United Christian Church of Godly Wife-Beating, you obtuse fuck. Do be a stranger.
`
MzNicky | 05.15.07 - 1:29 pm | #

MzNicky, I have calmly and plainly laid out my argument without resorting to calling you names like "obtuse fuck" or telling you to "go fuck yourself" (did you get that from Cheney?). The fact that you will not debate the issue, that all you have is personal attacks and hyperbole is disappointing.

You claim she is harming others yet you cannot back that up with evidence. You claim that she is in an physically abusive relationship yet you have no evidence and perhaps more revealingly, you do nothing (outside of ridicule her and those who defend her).

Now all you can do is try to sweep the whole sad episode under the rug because some of us were not ready to condemn some random individual for a lifestyle we find personally objectionable. Sorry I did not want to be apart of your mob. Next time I really will try to drink the koolaid.
f00bar jones | 05.15.07 - 1:44 pm | #

In the end, I am of the opinion that it is her right as an adult, or else the State needs to step in and declare her unfit to make her own decisions. I don't personally like that she ties this activity to a Christian duty, but hey, there are lots of people that get tax exemptions as a religion for much stranger things and beliefs.
I must agree, it either is a right to free speech or it is not, and without delving into equating it with racism and other things which are only criminal and not protected as free speech when defined by laws, it is not a line that can arbitrarily be drawn case by case; there is no picking and choosing when or to whom the freedoms of the constitution and bill of rights provide for ALL people, unless you're congress or the Supreme Court, having the power to issue or change laws and amend the constitution. There is a reason for separation of powers, although it's been pretty hard to find that separation for the last few years.
Wow, this little spark has sure erupted into a mushroom cloud, but then politics, religion and sex are usually the best incendiary devices for WMDs.
I think I get it, anyway...
isitme? | 05.15.07 - 2:46 pm | #

Really now, so she likes the little bottom spanked for being behind in the housework- notice how the house work always seems to be behind? This lady obviously likes this. And who is to blame her it can fun. Not sure about the blending of Christianisms with the fun of a good beating though…to dark ages for me.

Personally, I have a cat of nine tails, horse crop, leather swing and all the accessories and I don’t ask permission before I use it. But, at some point before whipping it (them) out, I have at the very least informed the partner being the object of my demented fun that I have fun in totally demented ways. Give them a code word for going to far and set the starting gun off. It is all good. Who are we to judge or care really what they do.

So, she opens it up for public consumption- good for her, crowds can be more fun. Have a good old fun party, and get to whipping everything out including the whipping cream- smoothes over the whelps from spatula wielding men…

Don’t we have more things to be concerned with? Really, this is too- common- for me to “worry my pretty little mind” over.

And besides, this is the closest a Christian has ever come to making me want to convert.

Good night all and to all a good night.
Spatula wielding man | 05.15.07 - 4:38 pm | #

I am so happy you wrote about this site, I joined to give them a piece of mind which was basically try and hit me and i will knock your fucking teeth out, the men replied with i wonder what she looks like,, huh, and a friend of mine who joined and supported my thoughts was told she needed a rubber hose instead of a paddle, sickening the whole site is...leah is a joke, she says she can stand up for herself and then bends over for an asswhooping for not doing her duties...whatever, its s & m cloaked in christianity to justify their own sick needs...
lloves | 06.21.07 - 6:46 am | #

In bdsm the sub IS NOT in control. Yet she chooses to relinqish it...that fact that you can't address this issue with intelligent language wounds your credibility. Feminism has brianwashed our society so much we can't tell authority from abuse.

"judge not lest ye be judged"
Anonymous | 07.09.07 - 11:30 am | #

f00bar jones:
IANAL, but I think she would have a hard time, especially after writing fiction glorifying the CDD lifestyle, proving in a court of law that she was abused or the victim of violence.

Leah Kelley is not her real name but I believe she uses a PO box:

Leah Kelley
P.O. Box 910613
Lexington, KY 40591

She attends a "mega-church" in Lexington that doesn't exactly endorse husbands spanking wives --but does demand submission.

I agree, quite a nutcase but there are many more like her.

One 60 yr old guy writes all the time, in great detail, how he spanks his wife, how it gives him the iron control he wants. Leah Kelley's blog is filled with this coot's writings. His email:

noone2u2@yahoo.com

Noone never gives his real name.
Westin | 08.13.07 - 10:58 pm | #

home loan officer police home loan officer police home loan officer police. advance borrow cash loan money now personal service simple simplepaydayloan.com advance borrow cash loan money now personal service simple simplepaydayloan.com advance borrow cash loan money now personal service simple simplepaydayloan.com.
femxgnul | Homepage | 08.26.07 - 8:03 am | #