>>3000067
Oh yea that is good. I don't feel it as humiliating, but a weird sensation of cooperation, the same sensation of stripping and assuming the position on your own.
One downside though is that, to give the spankee a reasonable chance to count, you have to limit the speed of the spanking, or outright give them control of the tempo.
This is usually okay since most people are either spanking for fun, or light discipline. So they want the spankee to have time to mentally process the fun or pain of each stroke. And that is "economical."
I prefer the intensity of the spanker just swinging non-stop. The spankee, for the pleasure or pain, can't maintain composure and is quickly overwhelmed.
It also makes discipline in a non-formal home environment feel more authentic. While formal settings might feature that time gap.
I like your idea of indirectly asking for more. I think it strikes a nice balance of control, where the spankee can count the moment they don't want to be spanked any more. But the spanker decides what number to count to.
To shift power towards the spanker more, the spankee can know how this works and to count, but not be told how much to count to. So there's no telling when the pain will actually end.
This is also very similar to the concept I've heard a few times, that disciplinary spankings don't start until the spankee wants it to end.
Any signal of enjoyment or arousal should be taken as a sign that nothing thus far has counted.
The spankee gets a mental rush that their own genitals are betraying them, putting them into a positive feedback loop of infinite swats until it stops being fun and their body language shows it.
