EvolvingYourMale.com – Should I Rename the Site?

I’ve had someone point out something rather interesting recently—the name of my blog, Evolving Your Man, and how it might actually sound better as Evolving Your Male. They suggested that “male” implies ownership, as if I’m stating that the man in the relationship is my property. I thought that was a fun little observation, and I’ve been mulling it over. After all, words carry weight, and the nuances of what we call things can spark entirely new conversations.

So, let’s break it down. The idea behind the blog’s name has always been about partnership, not ownership. Yes, we engage in a kinky and fun dynamic where I hold the reins a bit tighter, and yes, there’s an element of power exchange involved with our cuckold dynamic, orgasm control, and erotic humiliation. But at the end of the day, Kev and I are both mutually in love, mutually respected, and mutually aware of each other’s needs and desires. We’re both each other’s partners, lovers, and dare I say, property in some sense—if I’m his, then he’s definitely mine, too.

Now, this concept of mutual “property” really touches on something much deeper. Historically, the idea of being someone’s property, especially in relationships, comes with some heavy baggage. Let’s talk about coverture for a moment. Back in the not-so-distant past, when a woman got married, she essentially lost her legal identity. Coverture was a legal doctrine where a wife was subsumed under her husband’s identity—her rights, property, and everything else became his. A woman was legally invisible in a lot of ways. This notion is pretty horrifying today, especially when you think of the freedoms women enjoy now, but for centuries, it was the norm.

If I were born in the 1800s, instead of sitting here writing a blog about cuckolding, sexual health, and kinky female-led relationships, I’d be more like… a ghost of myself. I’d have no legal identity. My voice? Not heard. My rights? Nonexistent. The funny thing is, the doctrine of coverture was basically just a legal endorsement of something that had already existed in religious and cultural traditions—spouses being each other’s “property,” but only in the sense that the man owned the woman. A woman was expected to submit to her husband’s authority, and that, my friends, was backed by all sorts of religious and societal pressure.

Speaking of religion, the Bible is often thrown into the mix when discussing these old-school dynamics of male-female relationships. Since I’m agnostic, I don’t see the Bible as some divine rulebook, but I do recognize its influence as a piece of fiction or literature, much like The Handmaid’s Tale but with a bit more staying power. Biblically speaking, wives are often portrayed as property of their husbands, expected to be obedient and submissive. “Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands” is a line I’m sure many of us have heard at one point or another, whether we wanted to or not. It’s not exactly the romantic partnership I imagine when I think about Kev and me. Sure, I take the lead in our dynamic, and yes, there’s an element of submission on his part, but that’s because we’ve agreed on it. It’s consent-based, mutual, and more about empowerment than ownership. It’s erotic and playful, but no one’s actually “owned” in a legal or biblical sense.

Now, let’s play a little game of “what if”—what if we flipped this entire thing on its head and imagined a world where male coverture existed? Imagine a time where, when a man got married, he lost his legal identity and became subsumed under his wife’s identity. Picture it: A world where men were the ones who had no legal standing, no right to property, no voice. I think we’d see a lot of men suddenly far more interested in male chastity (although maybe not as consensually and erotically as Kev is, wink!). Imagine, too, the kinds of conversations that would dominate male-focused spaces—how to regain control, how to feel empowered in their relationships, and how to deal with the emotional angst of being the submissive gender.

If male coverture had been a thing in the 1800s, would we be living in a matriarchy now? Would we have a whole other history of “men’s liberation” movements? It’s wild to think about, especially when we consider how different the sexual dynamics would have been. Maybe there would have been more societal acceptance of male chastity, orgasm control, and female-led relationships—who knows, maybe we’d have an Evolving Your Woman blog written by some dude in Victorian times, with tips on how to properly lock away your masculinity and let your wife lead the household. It’s a fun little thought experiment, but again, it underscores how arbitrary and socially constructed so many of these dynamics are.

Let’s take this back to the core idea of property and relationships. Whether you’re looking at it from a biblical, historical, or modern perspective, the idea of one person “owning” another has been both normalized and challenged over time. In our relationship, Kev and I don’t see each other as property in the legal or societal sense—we’re equals who’ve chosen to enter into this dynamic because it works for us. But there’s still a playful tension in our relationship where that concept of ownership plays a role—at least, in the erotic sense. It adds spice to the relationship. I enjoy being in control of his orgasms, and he enjoys being my submissive. But that doesn’t make me his literal owner any more than he’s mine. It’s all about fun, intimacy, and connection.

This brings us back to the idea that maybe Evolving Your Male could sound a bit more “ownership-y” than Evolving Your Man. I can see that point. If we’re talking strictly linguistics, “man” feels more personal, more relational—like you’re guiding your partner through his evolution. “Male,” on the other hand, feels clinical, like you’re talking about a species or object, a step removed from an emotional connection. It subtly shifts the focus from partnership to power, which might not be the intention but could be the implication.

I suppose, at the end of the day, the choice between man and male is less about ownership and more about tone. I want the blog to feel relatable, approachable, and like a conversation between equals—partners in crime who happen to enjoy a dynamic where one takes the lead a little more often than the other. If I were to go with Evolving Your Male, it might start to feel a little too detached, too cold, when really, what we’re talking about here is intimacy, connection, and mutual respect—even with all the naughty bits thrown in.

No matter what you call it, it’s not about who owns whom. It’s about evolving together, hand in hand (or perhaps with one of us holding the keys to the chastity cage, but that’s neither here nor there). We’re both invested in each other’s growth, fulfillment, and happiness. I’m not his property, and he’s not mine—we’re each other’s biggest cheerleaders, advocates, and co-conspirators in this wild thing called life.

What I’m trying to say is that, whether it’s Evolving Your Man or Evolving Your Male, it’s about mutual respect, not dominance or submission. We can have a little fun with power dynamics, sure, but at the heart of it all is love, trust, and partnership. And really, that’s what makes our relationship work. So, I’ll stick with Evolving Your Man—not because it’s perfect, but because it better reflects the balance of playfulness and equality that defines what Kev and I share.

So while I appreciate the suggestion and the interesting conversation it sparked, I’ll be keeping the name as it is. After all, it’s not about the words we use; it’s about the love we share, the fun we have, and the journey we’re on together. With that said, as of this writing it looks like Evolvingyourmale.com is available for purchase if you want to create your own site and add it to the blogosphere.