This item is positively weird and discusses the combining of the erotic impulse with the spiritual impulse. How curious.
My initial difficulty with all this is that our erotic impulse is central to our animal self and is managed by our cognitive self with assistance from our consciousness. The central theme i accept is management. That does not necessarily mean actively exploiting it to optimize the physical result in this case sexual pleasure. This naturally leads to addictive feedback cycles that the self rationalize onto paths that become dangerous.
The same rational holds for combat bloodless. which represents a different path and by extension converting our appetites for foods int an obsessive form of gluttony. All this draws away from our spiritual aspect and merely provides an excuse for several forms of overinduligence or gluttony.
After saying all that much described here is as acceptable as many other forms of sexual stimulation between partners and can be left at that. It is at least a reminder regarding the nature of sin itself which is about undisciplined excess and true discipline involves many forms of denial.
The much more interesting aspect of this discussion is the issue of submission. This is also biologically wired. I do not know to what degree it differs from men to women but suspect it is about equal. Consider this thought. Ninety five percent of everybody is hard wired to communicate submission in the ordinary course of events simply because nothing could get done otherwise. The roles will change as circumstances change and with other participants. Thus it is a deeply held instinct and no surprise that in the physicality of sex that the male is expected to be dominant. That this can be expressed in terms of role playing is thus no surprise either and can also be left as just that.
The problem is the deliberate attempt to combine spirituality with any of this and that aspect is rubbish and merely an excuse to overcome deeply held objections in the psyche. It also informs of a naive spiritual formation. And St Paul was a traditional patriarch of his times and certainly should not be listened to in the modern world on this issue any more than the Koran for that matter.
Spare the rod
They are careful to distinguish their lifestyle from BDSM, whose strictly sadomasochistic elements they reject. In her CDD handbook, Kelley admonishes husbands in order to reassure their wives: ‘You will never gain pleasure from causing her pain.’ Yet in the same guidebook, she writes how a typical CDD husband is nonetheless ‘aroused by her submissive and trusting gesture by placing herself into a position to receive discipline’. The rationale here is predictable: ‘It seems natural that we would be aroused by [gender] roles in their most basic form. There are probably few things that punctuate our most basic roles in marriage more than the dominance and submission of a discipline session.’