Stephanie, that’s bullshit and you should know it.
I’ve made 1,890 posts here since 2003. If I really condoned spousal abuse, don’t you think it would be kinda obvious by now? The blog subtitle is “adult erotic spanking at its best” and I am resolutely committed to that motto. Unless you think that every spousal spanking is abuse (and if you do, you’d be wrong) that dog simply won’t hunt.
As for specifics:
1) I am about 90% certain that responding to that ad would have gotten you onto a mailing list for the purchase of erotic spanking porn. The ad was published in an era when spanking erotica was not publicly offered for sale due to obscenity concerns. A certain degree of obfuscation and misdirection in advertising was both necessary and common. It’s a comment on the era in which this ad was published that comic misogyny was much more acceptable than honest eroticism, but there’s nothing about that cultural fact that should keep us from republishing artifacts from that era.
2) You may equate the phase “beat your wife” with “spousal abuse”, but the equation is not true in all cases. I, myself, know married spankos who use phrases like “Woman, do you want me to beat you?” in all jocularity; and their wives are as likely to sigh and say “Promises, promises…” as anything else.
3) The illustration in the ad appears to show two happy people engaged in a spanking. That, alone, even ignoring the text, makes this suitable fodder for Spanking Blog. It also supports, I contend, my view that “spousal abuse” is not the point of the advertisement, despite the “beat your wife” phrasing.
4) Just because I post something on Spanking Blog does not mean I condone every connotation and possible interpretation of the material conveyed. What it means is, I think there’s some attribute of the material that fits within the “adult erotic spanking” rubric. In this case, that would be the illustration.
Stephanie, I recognize the likelihood that this post stumbled over one of your triggers. When dealing with edgy material displayed to a large audience, a certain amount of that is inevitable and inescapable. Your revulsion is your own business, but in future I’d thank you to remember that your interpretation of things is not an objective truth and may not be universally shared. In short, just because I publish something does not mean I condone your least-charitable interpretation of it.