# You go Gabby



## Deejo

Gabrielle Reece, Laird Hamilton's Wife, Says Being 'Submissive' Is A Sign Of Strength (VIDEO)

If it can work for beautiful, super-star athletes, it can work for you ...


----------



## Wiserforit

She makes clear in the video that "submissive" is the post-feminist definition. If you consider how to make your mate happy, that is being "submissive". A proper feminist frames every interaction with men from the lense of retribution - how can I strike back against men for millenia of oppression? 

After half a century of PC gender-speak and social programming directing women to pose themselves as collective victims and men as collective abusers, the pendulum is starting to swing the other way. The proportion of young men wanting to marry has fallen in half recently and this gender war has been cited as the primary culprit. 

This site has been pleasantly surprising for the number of women who are not part of the man-hating cult. It's pretty easy to see who thinks of themselves as avengers. Whatever man you are currently talking to is not an individual worthy of evaluating on his own merits. He is part of the enemy army, guilty of the alleged sins by all other men and must be put in his place. 

To a woman so inculcated, forming a partnership instead with mutual reciprocity is being "submissive". So it is a huge revelation to them that treating a man nicely gets you treated nicely in return.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Who doesn't like a little dungeon action?!


----------



## Caribbean Man

I just looked at the video and much of it reminds me of the same type of struggles my wife and I had around year three.
She was accustomed to being independent and taking care of herself, never grew up with her father, so problems started.
She was willing to serve me just like I was willing to serve her , but she couldn't grasp the idea of submitting to a man. Not that she didn't want to, she just couldn't get it.
We went to MC, and thankfully the MC was a good friend of mine & a female.
Amongst other things she explained it perfectly.
we were able to work on our various problems.

I remember telling my wife after in an argument we had sometime after:

"..._Hon, it's you and me against the world, not you and me against each other_..."

I also told her that when I got married, it was forever....

We still have our little fights, but its nothing as serious as before, and its centred around running our business
Submission is a foundation principle in marriage, but a man must first prove himself worthy of leadership.

I miss not having children though.......


----------



## Deejo

We have touched on this subject more than a few times. And yes, generally, the majority of females fundamentally bristle at the notion, which I find interesting in and of itself.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

I don't bristle at the notion at all. She says it works in her marriage and to that I say hats off. What I don't appreciate however is her saying that in order to be feminine, you must be submissive. She should have said in order for HER to feel feminine she needs to be submissive. There are plenty of women who are their husbands equals, their partner, who exude femininity and their husbands can't get enough of them.


----------



## Wiserforit

It varies a lot amongst countries, amongst regions within countries, and even across demographic groups and socioeconomic classes within a city. It varies by age and by life experience too.


----------



## Caribbean Man

A person can be both submissive and equal at the same time.
Submission does not equate weakness.
The act of sexual intercourse is in a self an act of submission on the part of a woman, but she must first desire to submit.
Does that submission maker her lesser or weak?

Even in the concept of 50 /50 in a marriage , submission on the part of either party is required for the relationship to be functional.
There can be no real progress in the relationship if neither wants to submit. 
However it is a relative concept , and varies from couple to couple .

Two people come together with different strengths and weaknesses , if my wife is a financial whiz , as the average woman is , I should submit to her financial aptitude.
Or should I demand 50 /50 input in all financial decisions ?
Sounds like confusion to me.
In any event , how does a couple calculate this 50 / 50 formula?
If we go to a fancy restaurant , does she have to pay half?
And if I pay the bill., does it mean she has to return the favor by taking me out the next time, and paying ?
Suppose I make twice her salary , should I demand that she comes up with half the mortgage , groceries , utilities , and general expenses?
Even if she did, she would still be at a disadvantage ,at the end of the month , she would be broke.
A better option would be to discuss goals and objectives , agree , and work towards them.
She wants to advance her career before having kids, we agree, so she goes to school, I pay the bills for the duration of her studies .
No complex algebraic functions needed to work out basic stuff.
The exact, same concept applies if a wife earns much more than h husband. I have seen it work.
Whenever I hear the 50 / 50 thing it reminds me of when I had a business with a partner , who would insist that we had meetings for every little decision . If I negotiated a contract with a customer and somewhere along the line there was a minor change, instead of allowing me the leeway of making a decision to move forward or renegotiate , he always insisted that we must meet first and discuss.
Needless to say, the business went bust, too much red tape and no autonomy. It was time and energy consuming.
Marriage involves a lot of work, unselfish giving , self sacrifice by both partners, and yes, SUBMISSION.
If you cannot give 100% freely , forget it , stay single.
Whenever power and control issues take centre stage in a marriage, it is DOOMED TO FAIL.
It is much better to be the best wife / husband you can be , rather than wasting time fighting over 50 / 50.
A lot of people simply aren't compatible , no amount of 50 / 50 could fix that.


----------



## Deejo

*Re: Re: You go Gabby*



Trenton said:


> This is a thread that goes directly into the category of Are You Kidding Me?!
> 
> Followed directly by:
> 
> Not Worth My Time


Exactly.

Which means that you couldn't possibly have watched the interview to discover that her definition of submissive is that a woman serves her partner and family for the betterment of her partner and family and the expectation of reciprocity.

The media chose to focus on and sensationalize her notion of gender roles; when what she REALLY had to say about 'submissiveness' is in fact a no-brainer.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Deejo said:


> * a woman serves her partner and family for the betterment of her partner and family and the expectation of reciprocity.*


^^My point , exactly!
Submission is actually a _two way_ street in a marriage.

Both parties submit 100% to each other's wants , desires and needs for the betterment of the marriage and family.

The notion of 50 / 50 is incongruous with the concept of submission.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

Wiserforit said:


> She makes clear in the video that "submissive" is the post-feminist definition. If you consider how to make your mate happy, that is being "submissive".


I haven't been able to view the vid but this caught my eye.I hadn't realized that considering how to make your partner happy means you're being submissive. If that truly is the case then my partner and I can both be considered submissive.It's funny though,when I think of the word submissive,it's always in the sexual 50 shades sense


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Trenton said:


> This is a thread that goes directly into the category of Are You Kidding Me?!
> 
> Followed directly by:
> 
> Not Worth My Time


I was glad to see in the Huff post comments that women aren't buying this tripe. Of course men like it....they get what they want and all the ego stroking and having the little woman under their thumb. 

It's not "man hating" to refuse to submit. I'd refuse to submit to a woman as well. I'm no one's inferior and my husband and I are equal in all things. Maybe I married a gem...he doesn't *expect* me to submit to him....then I wouldn't be ME. We are in this marriage, this family, together. We are partners. I would never respect a man who thought he had to run things simply because he had a penis. How stupid is that?:scratchhead:


----------



## COguy

The interesting thing from my side has been listening to this forum conversation played out in real life over the last few months.

I hear women consistently TALK about how they don't need men, they are independent, blah blah blah. And then you see how they RESPOND when a man takes charge.

And no most men do NOT prefer this. Most men are content to sit on the couch while the women runs the house. Those are called failing marriages. Cooincidence? It takes strength and character to lead, even more so to do it compassionately and lovingly.

As with most things in life, dancing is the ultimate metaphor. When you see it done right, you can't tell that the man is leading the woman. It does not require brute force or pain, a simple gesture done lightly yet firmly is enough to move a woman across a dance floor. Imagine what would happen if she didn't "need" him to show her where to go?

Stop trying to fight biology. Women are programmed through natural law to get turned on by this. The x chromosomes don't care that you live in a civilized society where there aren't swarms of men trying to beat you over the head with clubs.


----------



## COguy

Oh and to go back to dancing, the worst experience for a man is when a "strong independent" type starts to come to class, and absolutely refuses to be lead. Have it your way, see how that works out...


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

COguy said:


> Stop trying to fight biology. Women are programmed through natural law to get turned on by this. The x chromosomes don't care that you live in a civilized society where there aren't swarms of men trying to beat you over the head with clubs.


Bullcrap. 

I married a passive, gentle guy. Were he anything else, I'd be utterly uninterested. I don't want to spend my life butting heads with a man who thinks he needs to run the show just to prove he's a man. How tiresome. I have a much happier union with a man where we are equals. 
I do what I want, but I do what is best for the family. He does the same and it all works out.


----------



## COguy

LadyOfTheLake said:


> Bullcrap.
> 
> I married a passive, gentle guy. Were he anything else, I'd be utterly uninterested. I don't want to spend my life butting heads with a man who thinks he needs to run the show just to prove he's a man. How tiresome. I have a much happier union with a man where we are equals.
> I do what I want, but I do what is best for the family. He does the same and it all works out.


So in a situation where you fundamentally disagree on what is best for the family, what do you prefer? That he gives in and acquiesces to your demands, or stands up and makes an executive decision?

And I'm not opposed to agreeing that SOME women are turned on by passive men. But in my experience, the overwhelming majority do not prefer it, regardless of what they verbalize. And there is thousands of years of data to back up my assertion that it is in fact biology. Just like biology dictates that men are stronger than women, yet you will find an occasional lady that can out bench me.

You live in a small sliver of space and time, which biology can not react fast enough for, where women are not subjected to violence on a regular basis. It's a survival trait to be attracted to strength, power, and leadership. That can't be undone in a few generations.


----------



## Dollystanford

Isn't she the chick that does lots of photoshoots in her knickers?


----------



## Almostrecovered

bottom line is that people can live happily in which ever means that they see fit as long as all parties are consenting and no one is getting hurt. 

So a celebrity prefers to be submissive in her relationship, bully for her. Doesn't mean that everyone or even the majority would be happy to live in the same manner. To assume otherwise is silly.


----------



## Shadow_Nirvana

A man disregarding biological imperatives does so at his own peril.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

COguy said:


> So in a situation where you fundamentally disagree on what is best for the family, what do you prefer? That he gives in and acquiesces to your demands, or stands up and makes an executive decision?


Well, in 10+ years together, we've yet to come across a problem that calm discussion and compromise can't solve. He doesn't "give in" to my "demands" because he is not a wimp and I don't make demands. Nor does he make "executive decisions" because I am not his subordinate. He's made some bad decisions that I didn't agree with and I've made some that he didn't agree with.....but we both went along with the other out of compromise. I'm trying to think of an example where one of us would have to make a final call decision against the wishes of the other and I can't think of anything. 

Hubs is a strong man, physically. He can bench more than I weigh and is trained in MMA style fighting because that is something he enjoys. But he's even stronger in my eyes in that he can share power in a relationship and doesn't have to have it all to himself. That shows a truly strong and secure man.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Caribbean Man said:


> A person can be both submissive and equal at the same time.


When you are submissive you submit to someone else's will. Literally, you put your own desires lower than theirs. You can see this in the Latin root of submit, submittere, which is formed by sub- "under" + mittere "put." That isn't equal whatsoever. Perhaps she meant to say compromise which has far different connotations. 

As I said, if it works for her then cool. Plenty of successful marriages have different ways to become a success. To suggest however that if all women don't adopt this model they are less feminine or not feminine at all comes off as sanctimonious and really rubs me the wrong way.


----------



## Sanity

LadyOfTheLake said:


> I was glad to see in the Huff post comments that women aren't buying this tripe. Of course men like it....they get what they want and all the ego stroking and having the little woman under their thumb.
> 
> It's not "man hating" to refuse to submit. I'd refuse to submit to a woman as well. I'm no one's inferior and my husband and I are equal in all things. Maybe I married a gem...he doesn't *expect* me to submit to him....then I wouldn't be ME. We are in this marriage, this family, together. We are partners. I would never respect a man who thought he had to run things simply because he had a penis. How stupid is that?:scratchhead:


I can't speak for all men but if my ex would have taken Gabby's advice and practiced say 40% of it, I would have swam through shark infested waters just to get her a drink of water. There is nothing wrong with serving your man because a good man will serve you 10X over. I know this because I served a horrible woman for years who considered any form of "submission" a weakness. 

If monkey's can figure it out why can't you! 

Wild Wives of Africa - Bonobo Love - YouTube


----------



## ScarletBegonias

LadyOfTheLake said:


> Well, in 10+ years together, we've yet to come across a problem that calm discussion and compromise can't solve. He doesn't "give in" to my "demands" because he is not a wimp and I don't make demands. Nor does he make "executive decisions" because I am not his subordinate. He's made some bad decisions that I didn't agree with and I've made some that he didn't agree with.....but we both went along with the other out of compromise. I'm trying to think of an example where one of us would have to make a final call decision against the wishes of the other and I can't think of anything.


I always considered the dynamic where you both make decisions together and compromise as the ideal relationship.

Joint decisions,compromise when needed,and doing your best to make sure you're meeting each others needs...that's the relationship I like hearing about


----------



## Deejo

So ... you have two individuals at the undisputed TOP of their respective careers. Both very strong, driven, high achievers.

And they filed for divorce within 4 years. Then found a way to make it work and it came down to both of them acquiescing, compromising, lowering demands, or ... submitting.

All in an effort to make their marriage work. To serve the best interests of their relationship and their children's well-being.

And what do we get from her talking about it how it works for them and what it looks like?

People carping and crowing about submissive = less than.

And that isn't what she's saying. Isn't what he expects, and isn't what most men expect.

My perspective? I love strong independent women. If she consistently feels the need to prove to me that she is strong and independent at the expense of sensibility, femininity, _and accepting that like it or not, we ARE two different genders, and those genders serve roles in the relationship_, than I wish her the best. She can be strong and independent without me.

I don't think I'll ever understand why the concept of roles in a relationship or marriage has become anathema to the fairer sex. Particularly if following that template works for both partners feeling fulfilled and satisfied. 

If you feel fulfilled and satisfied with the concept of something else ... I'm not going to argue with that either.

I just think continuing to insist that tradition is bad, while the female concept of 'having it all' is good ... while marriage statistics continues to tank, begs the obvious question.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

Deejo said:


> I just think continuing to insist that tradition is bad, while the female concept of 'having it all' is good ... while marriage statistics continues to tank, begs the obvious question.


I don't know about the rest of the ball of wax but having it all is damn hard Tried it,failed,and felt like a loser bc of it for a long time.


----------



## Deejo

Dollystanford said:


> Isn't she the chick that does lots of photoshoots in her knickers?


Most of her career was jumping around a sand-pit smacking a ball in her knickers.

She was a world class beach volley-ball player. 

He is/was a world class surfer.

If you ever have the opportunity, watch the documentary "Step into Liquid"


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Being a strong, independant woman and a tender, loving, wife, are not mutually exclusive roles. Just beacuse I am not a doormat does not mean that I don't have my husbands best interests at heart. I haven't been married this long by making the relationship all about me. I love him and his happiness is very very important to me. His happiness is critical to mine. That being said, he married ME. He know I will never ever kow tow to any man. I perform acts of service for my husband out of love, but I don't "serve" him. He isn't "serving" me when he reciprocates. We are taking care of each other and it has nothing to do with power dynamics. 
I don't want a man who needs to be served. Thankfully, my husband doesn't need a servant.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Deejo

ScarletBegonias said:


> I don't know about the rest of the ball of wax but having it all is damn hard Tried it,failed,and felt like a loser bc of it for a long time.


Which is pretty much what Gabby was saying before the interviewer redirected the questions.

I don't need a woman who insists on 'having it all'. I could care less if she is an accomplished scholar, mother of the year, and a captain of industry, and runs the PTA. I need a woman that wants to 'have' me and my love in her heart, and our relationship as the foundation from which both challenges and successes are overcome, lifted up and we both prosper as a result.


----------



## Shadow_Nirvana

Not to mention, in places like MMSL and other red pill marriage avenues, men are always advised to become Captain, not dictators and tyrants. 

Dominating became domineering and intimidating; Submitting became being a doormat. Such is the way of modern feminist mumbo jumbo.


----------



## COguy

LadyOfTheLake said:


> But he's even stronger in my eyes in that he can share power in a relationship and doesn't have to have it all to himself. That shows a truly strong and secure man.


I think you're setting up a false dichotomy/straw man, where you associate traditional male roles of leadership with being a power hungry warmonger.

Submission and servant leadership is not about domineering. It's about accepting direction from one person in an effort to more effectively navigate.

I'll just keep talking about dancing because I don't think a better metaphor exists. When you first start to learn to lead, you overpower your partner. As you get better, you can learn to direct the other person with very subtle, gentle touches. Expert dancers often practice by leading with their finger tips only. Once you've been dancing with a partner long enough, it requires almost no effort, and neither person feels superior, they are just dancing.

Now if you've been doing this long enough, you accept the role of the other partner and it becomes effortless and beautiful. However, it does not mean that the lady is without free will, or subserviant. It is a mutually beneficial relationship. And furthermore, there are times, when for whatever reason, the lady MUST lead, and it is at those times when a good leader will back off and accept that there is good reason.

This happened to me a few weeks ago when my lane was clear and I was leading a back step. My partner pulled on my shoulder to move me. I knew there was a good reason for this, and I knew my partner was a great follower. She wouldn't have tried to force me if there was not a good reason and I trusted and yielded to her judgement. Turns out a couple came out of nowhere and had I been a domineering brute, would have ran right into them.

Now how is this relationship domineering or overpowering? Can you imagine the chaos that would ensue if both of us tried to lead eachother equally? If I was planning on going one way and my partner wanted to go the other, and we had to contest of will out on the dance floor? The first thing you learn as a follower is that you follow your leader even if he is making a mistake. Because it's much better and easier to recover when you are working together then if you get your toes stepped on in the middle of a crowded dance floor.

Life is like dancing. And being a good leader in a relationship is no different than being a good one on the dance floor. It involves being confident, acting with purpose, being gentle, responding to your partner, and being open to suggestions at all times.


----------



## always_alone

Deejo said:


> If she consistently feels the need to prove to me that she is strong and independent at the expense of sensibility, femininity, _and accepting that like it or not, we ARE two different genders, and those genders serve roles in the relationship_, than I wish her the best. She can be strong and independent without me.
> 
> I don't think I'll ever understand why the concept of roles in a relationship or marriage has become anathema to the fairer sex. Particularly if following that template works for both partners feeling fulfilled and satisfied.


*If* the template works for both, then there's no reason to object to it. The problem is that most of this gender role stuff feels more like being stuffed into a little tiny box than it does any kind of recipe for happiness. To me, at any rate.

Notice that she never suggested that Laird should submit. He just needs to cherish her and be masculine --which is usually parsed as being the dominant to her submissive by traditional gender role advocates. 

Even Caribbean Man's post which explicitly advocated submission on both sides, ended one post with the man in the lead. If you get to stay in the lead, it ain't really submission.

I'm with Lady of the Lake. Pass.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Shadow_Nirvana said:


> Not to mention, in places like MMSL and other red pill marriage avenues, men are always advised to become Captain, not dictators and tyrants.
> 
> Dominating became domineering and intimidating; Submitting became being a doormat. Such is the way of modern feminist mumbo jumbo.


I've never read MMSL so I don't know what the "red pill" refers to.

But think about this, would you want to feel like you were not in charge of your life? Your home? That someone else held the reigns? Would you ever trust someone that much? No? I didn't think so.

Neither do women. Why do men think that women want to hand over control of everything and sit back and be pretty little housemaids? Let the man be the CEO and the little wife can be the secretary? F that!!!! 

Men and women can compliment each other, we have to put aside the machismo and the need to dominate. Peace lies in equality.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Sanity said:


> I can't speak for all men but if my ex would have taken Gabby's advice and practiced say 40% of it, I would have swam through shark infested waters just to get her a drink of water. There is nothing wrong with serving your man because a good man will serve you 10X over. I know this because I served a horrible woman for years who considered any form of "submission" a weakness.
> 
> If monkey's can figure it out why can't you!
> 
> Wild Wives of Africa - Bonobo Love - YouTube


I agree that there is nothing wrong with "service" to each other but like with most things, everybody has a different idea of what that means. Between partners, this should be defined.


----------



## always_alone

COguy said:


> The first thing you learn as a follower is that you follow your leader even if he is making a mistake. Because it's much better and easier to recover when you are working together then if you get your toes stepped on in the middle of a crowded dance floor.


Since you are such a good follower and know so much about it, why don't you take on that role?

After all, it's so much easier and better when you are working together than when you are butting heads.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

COguy, I don't know much about dancing, but I'd say modern marriage is more like the free style, hip hop or jazz stuff you see on Dancing With The Stars, than old school male led ballroom style. The days of the marital fox trot are over


----------



## Wiserforit

ScarletBegonias said:


> I haven't been able to view the vid but this caught my eye.I hadn't realized that considering how to make your partner happy means you're being submissive. If that truly is the case then my partner and I can both be considered submissive.It's funny though,when I think of the word submissive,it's always in the sexual 50 shades sense


As I said most of the women on this forum don't buy into the uber-defensiveness of the "men are the enemy" creed. I think a lot of it has to do with sheer practical life experience. 

Eventually you figure out that if you are constantly in people's faces saying "I don't need you, nobody tells me what to do, that's making me a slave, ten thousand years of oppression, blah blah blah..." That you are just a nasty person to be around. 

Most of both men and women on this forum get the concept of reciprocity. I know you do, for sure.


----------



## Shadow_Nirvana

LadyOfTheLake said:


> But think about this, would you want to feel like you were not in charge of your life? Your home? That someone else held the reigns? Would you ever trust someone that much? No? I didn't think so.


Yet this is how nearly every man feels in a "so-called" equal marriage. House gets designed in the way the woman wants, the woman spends %80 of the money in the household, the stuff done is the stuff the woman wants, the home's happiness is based on how happy the woman is etc etc. Screw that. My ancestors are men who were strong and benevolent leaders. Who am I to resist that hard biology carved into me?


----------



## Shadow_Nirvana

LadyOfTheLake said:


> The days of the marital fox trot are over


Fortunately, they are not. It's just subtler.


----------



## COguy

always_alone said:


> Since you are such a good follower and know so much about it, why don't you take on that role?
> 
> After all, it's so much easier and better when you are working together than when you are butting heads.


Because, as explained, I am biologically wired to be a leader.

Argue it all you want, it's basic science. And it doesn't make men superior to anyone. It's just a different skillset.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

COguy said:


> Because, as explained, I am biologically wired to be a leader.
> 
> Argue it all you want, it's basic science. And it doesn't make men superior to anyone. It's just a different skillset.


I think it's going to be way too easy to take offense to your first sentence.It comes off smug and superior.

Leadership is not gender specific.


----------



## always_alone

Shadow_Nirvana said:


> Dominating became domineering and intimidating; Submitting became being a doormat. Such is the way of modern feminist mumbo jumbo.


No, this is just the interpretation of anti-feminists with a chip on their shoulder because their wives and girlfriends aren't accepting the "rules".


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

COguy said:


> Because, as explained, I am biologically wired to be a leader.
> 
> Argue it all you want, it's basic science. And it doesn't make men superior to anyone. It's just a different skillset.


But how do you know that? How do you know that you're wife isn't a better leader? Maybe your life and relationship would be 10x better if she were at the helm. Perhaps she is just humouring your fragile ego by letting you THINK you are leading, whereas she has been influencing you all along...


----------



## COguy

LadyOfTheLake said:


> COguy, I don't know much about dancing, but I'd say modern marriage is more like the free style, hip hop or jazz stuff you see on Dancing With The Stars, than old school male led ballroom style. The days of the marital fox trot are over


Exactly, everyone wants to dance to their own tune these days...

Divorce rate is skyrocketing....cooincidence?


And P.S., Dancing with the stars IS ballroom. The dancers on that show are all world champions and suscribe to the same theory I was just discussing on the floor.


----------



## Shadow_Nirvana

always_alone said:


> No, this is just the interpretation of anti-feminists with a chip on their shoulder because their wives and girlfriends aren't accepting the "rules".


Well, my GF accepts the "rules"(as you so uneloquently put it) and I still think it is modern feminist mumbo jumbo. Go figure.


----------



## okeydokie

I love it when the ladies get lead into this fight


----------



## Shadow_Nirvana

LadyOfTheLake said:


> But how do you know that? How do you know that you're wife isn't a better leader? Maybe your life and relationship would be 10x better if she were at the helm. Perhaps she is just humouring your fragile ego by letting you THINK you are leading, whereas she has been influencing you all along...


And the long awaited fragile ego comment. You win the interwebz.

I don't believe a woman would stand by a man whom she doesn't accept as a leader of the marriage. We see it time and time again with little exceptions.

And never is it said a leader's decisions aren't up for change. In fact one of the important qualities of a leader has to be being able to change his decision based on feedback.


----------



## COguy

ScarletBegonias said:


> I think it's going to be way too easy to take offense to your first sentence.It comes off smug and superior.
> 
> Leadership is not gender specific.


It's only because the term leader is loaded.

I've heard feminists object when I say men are stronger and faster then women. Does that make me smug and superior?

It's the exact thing I am objecting too and find appalling to the modern feminist.

Saying men are wired to be leaders should be no more insulting than saying men are stronger than women. It's not superior, it's just a different skillset. It doesn't mean that women can not be leaders, or that men are BETTER morally or genetically. It just is what it is.

And no it doesn't speak for 100% of women. If I picked a 100 women at random I'm sure one of them would be faster and stronger than most men. I'm sure one of them would be a better leader. But as a whole, we are DIFFERENT. And I think it's nonsensical that instead of celebrating these differences that we have, we try to equalize everyone and pretend that we all have penises.


----------



## Deejo

always_alone said:


> No, this is just the interpretation of anti-feminists with a chip on their shoulder because their wives and girlfriends aren't accepting the "rules".


Which is why the current trend is for young men to skip wifing altogether, much to the chagrin of women wanting to become wives and mothers.

Is that better?

Who's accountable there? Not baiting, serious question.


----------



## Wiserforit

COguy said:


> I hear women consistently TALK about how they don't need men, they are independent, blah blah blah.


I think this is actually a very small but highly vocal minority, and the irony is that one in particular has this "I'm independent, I'm independent. I'm independent" siren wailing 24/7, 365 days a year. First thing she says in the morning. Last thing before bed. 

A veritable Tourette's Syndrome of "I'm independent". 

Well if you are so strong and independent then why are you so insecure that you have to keep repeating this ad nauseum? :scratchhead: People who actually ARE strong and independent don't feel the need to keep insisting how strong and independent they are. 

Women who actually do have strength of character and assume leadership positions like Margaret Thatcher aren't constantly whining like this.

There is a delusional narcissism evident with this that in reality is a person who is at the very back of a long historic line pretending they are at the front of it.

More than a century ago there were real leaders in the Woman's Sufferage movement, and then half a century ago another wave alongside other leaders in the civil rights era.

A woman coming along at the very back of the pack, generations behind these women who actually did demonstrate strength of character, and screeching incessantly about how independent they are - as if that were some kind of unique innovation and epic historic claim... is _delusional._ 

This is not the 1940's. Nobody needs to hear this gender war framing any more. It's over, and it has been over for a long time. Just get over yourself.


----------



## Deejo

okeydokie said:


> I love it when the ladies get lead into this fight


It's like chumming the water ... but my intention isn't another feminist love-fest.

COguy's analogy of a dance is most appropriate. Men are supposed to lead in a dance ... and a man that can't, or won't, generally isn't considered a very good dancer.

But now? Even that harmless analogy is utterly loaded.

Never ceases to amaze me when you have the conversation with someone who get's it, versus someone that sees a completely different paradigm.

Submission is a choice, not a demand. It is a gift given by the submitter, not a thing to be taken by the recipient.

And THAT, is what makes it a loving gesture that imparts the desire for reciprocity, upon the one whom the gift is bestowed.

Let's face it, take reciprocity out of the equation and you don't have much of a relationship or marriage anyway.

But it's definitely more fun to fight and argue about it, I'll give you that.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

COguy said:


> It's only because the term leader is loaded.
> 
> I've heard feminists object when I say men are stronger and faster then women. Does that make me smug and superior?
> 
> It's the exact thing I am objecting too and find appalling to the modern feminist.
> 
> Saying men are wired to be leaders should be no more insulting than saying men are stronger than women. It's not superior, it's just a different skillset. It doesn't mean that women can not be leaders, or that men are BETTER morally or genetically. It just is what it is.
> 
> And no it doesn't speak for 100% of women. If I picked a 100 women at random I'm sure one of them would be faster and stronger than most men. I'm sure one of them would be a better leader. But as a whole, we are DIFFERENT. And I think it's nonsensical that instead of celebrating these differences that we have, we try to equalize everyone and pretend that we all have penises.


the term is loaded which is why I figured it would be best to stay away from it,but of course,it's your post so ultimately your choice for how you wish to appear to others. 

I can agree that many men are faster and stronger than many women.

Admittedly I'm naive because I don't see most people trying to pretend we all have penises.
I just see people wanting the world to be fair and wanting people to respect each other.

Of course there are a few radical feminists who have lost all meaning of what feminism truly means so they go on their tirade and attack anything possessing a penis.On the flip side there are still many men out there who feel women should have no voice and have no right to individuality or any sort of equality.
The genders hurt each other and it's all over some ridiculous power struggle.


----------



## Shadow_Nirvana

ScarletBegonias said:


> .On the flip side there are still many men out there who feel women should have no voice and have no right to individuality or any sort of equality.


I have to ask something. Where are these men and how are they going to accomplish these goals? Do they have a switch that can take us back to the premodern eras?


----------



## always_alone

COguy said:


> Because, as explained, I am biologically wired to be a leader.
> 
> Argue it all you want, it's basic science. And it doesn't make men superior to anyone. It's just a different skillset.


:rofl:. Is this the same basic science that tells us that men are programmed to spread their seed? Cuz there's a pretty big difference between trying to sleep with everything in sight and being a good leader.

Just saying.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Therealbrighteyes said:


> When you are submissive you submit to someone else's will. Literally, you put your own desires lower than theirs.


And this part here ^^ is why some marriages work and others fail.
When each partner submits 100% to each other's will, only then can a marriage work.
That's why 50 / 50 can never work, because nobody wants to put their partner's will above theirs..
But if both partners do it in a _reciprocal_ fashion , success is guaranteed.
Reciprocal being the operative word here.

My wife has my back 100%
I've got hers 100%


----------



## ScarletBegonias

Shadow_Nirvana said:


> I have to ask something. Where are these men and how are they going to accomplish these goals? Do they have a switch that can take us back to the premodern eras?


I never said they would accomplish anything or take us back to premodern eras.These men are all over the place.Same as the radical feminists are all over the place.


----------



## Shadow_Nirvana

always_alone said:


> :rofl:. Is this the same basic science that tells us that men are programmed to spread their seed? Cuz there's a pretty big difference between trying to sleep with everything in sight and being a good leader.
> 
> Just saying.


Wow. Okay. So ignorant. 

This is what it comes to in the end. Evolutionary science vs random tomfoolery.


----------



## Caribbean Man

COguy said:


> As with most things in life, dancing is the ultimate metaphor. When you see it done right, you can't tell that the man is leading the woman. It does not require brute force or pain, a simple gesture done lightly yet firmly is enough to move a woman across a dance floor. Imagine what would happen if she didn't "need" him to show her where to go?


:iagree:

Perfect examples, dance and sex...


----------



## Caribbean Man

Deejo said:


> Submission is a choice, not a demand. It is a gift given by the submitter, not a thing to be taken by the recipient.
> 
> *And THAT, is what makes it a loving gesture that imparts the desire for reciprocity, upon the one whom the gift is bestowed.
> *
> Let's face it, take reciprocity out of the equation and you don't have much of a relationship or marriage anyway.


PERFECTLY SAID.
Its just common sense.

I think the problem is that a lot of women when they hear the term " submission" negative images comes to their mind.
Images of doing whatever your husband says and so forth.

Nothing could be further from the truth.
Love in itself is an act of submission.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

Caribbean Man said:


> PERFECTLY SAID.
> Its just common sense.
> 
> I think the problem is that a lot of women when they hear the term " submission" negative images comes to their mind.
> Images of doing whatever your husband says and so forth.
> 
> Nothing could be further from the truth.


I can't say for certain but I feel this happens because maybe women have been with men who abuse the leadership role and plant the image of submission being something horribly suffocating and negative.
For me,my mother was the one who taught me to buck against being all things traditionally feminine.She taught me men were evil until I was old enough to know better.


----------



## Caribbean Man

always_alone said:


> Even Caribbean Man's post which explicitly advocated submission on both sides, ended one post with the man in the lead. If you get to stay in the lead, it ain't really submission.
> 
> I'm with Lady of the Lake. Pass.


So generally you have a problem with a man leading?
Yes?
What about if a woman's leading, do you have a problem with that,
or is that more acceptable to you?
See?
Therin lies the problem.
That's why I'm saying that 50 / 50 BS CANNOT WORK!


----------



## always_alone

Deejo said:


> Which is why the current trend is for young men to skip wifing altogether, much to the chagrin of women wanting to become wives and mothers.
> 
> Is that better?


It might be, given how damaged boys have become from trying to live up to the traditional notions of masculinity: Raising Cain: Protecting the Emotional Life of Boys http://www.amazon.ca/Raising-Cain-Protecting-Emotional-Life/dp/product-description/0345434854

It's really quite interesting how firmly men will cling to these stereotypes no matter how much damage it does them. And if a woman dares to challenge, she's just a rabid man-hater responsible for increasing divorce rates and societal malaise.

Traditional roles may work for some, but they don't work for all. And it's quite possible that they never did. People often got together and stayed in these traditional roles because they felt like they didn't have a choice -- not because they were happy.


----------



## COguy

always_alone said:


> :rofl:. Is this the same basic science that tells us that men are programmed to spread their seed? Cuz there's a pretty big difference between trying to sleep with everything in sight and being a good leader.
> 
> Just saying.


A+ for logical deduction....


----------



## Faithful Wife

I am a life long dancer, and have also always used the dancing (lead - follow, male - female) analogy.

I do, however, also know how to lead. 

Leading is harder than following, and that's why I wanted to learn how to do it. I've been dancing so long I needed a new challenge.

Anyway, I totally concur that, as a follow, the feeling of being swept around the room is very heavenly, and it can be a sexual feeling...or it can be just its own type of heaven (depends on whether you are dancing with your sexual partner or just a dance friend).

The feeling of leading is very different. You don't get to relax. You are on guard the whole dance. Although there are times as a lead, if you are dancing with a great partner and depending on the type of dance and use of the floor, that you can let go a little bit. But mostly you are concentrating on giving your follow a great ride, and that takes a lot of skill.

If you are a good enough lead, you will also be able to handle it if your follower pulls a back-lead on you.

(Side note: the dancing on Dancing With The Stars is all choreographed...it is not true lead-follow dancing...it is a learned routine, every time. In true lead-follow dancing, you never know what will happen. In a routine, you always know what wil happen).

I do think it is a really nice analogy, but only for certain types of sexual play. I don't think it applies to relationships necessarily.

My husband and I have a really great, experimental sexual relationship. Submission as a sexual term is its own whole thing. Submission in our relationship? We both submit as needed, but there's not a "leader". He submits to my expertise in some areas, and I submit to his in others.


----------



## okeydokie

Anybody watch golf? When tiger is playing you can hear a lot of women literally squeeling over him. Why is that, after what he did, I find him repulsive


----------



## ScarletBegonias

okeydokie said:


> Anybody watch golf? When tiger is playing you can hear a lot of women literally squeeling over him. Why is that, after what he did, I find him repulsive


he's still a fantastic golfer  Although,I was happy to see the Aussie guy won.It would have been nice for Angel to win but it's so thrilling to see someone win for the very first time.


----------



## Wiserforit

I don't like the men vs. women framing any more than I like black vs. white or old vs. young, etc.

We're all just people. Individuals. Sure, there are biological differences and each of us plays different roles depending on whether you are at work, home, recreating, practicing your religion, or whatever. 

But we have to solve our problems by working together as a team. The need to frame everything as a war between us is a terrible social legacy to leave unto the next generation. What a bad example we set for them if we do it this way.


----------



## Caribbean Man

LadyOfTheLake said:


> But think about this, would you want to feel like you were not in charge of your life? Your home? That someone else held the reigns? Would you ever trust someone that much? No? I didn't think so.
> .


^^Oh God....
Everytime you board an Airplane , you put your life in the hands of a complete stranger, someone you've never met.
For the next few hours, you are not in control of your life, NOT EVEN THE AIR YOU BREATHE , the flight crews control that.
Yet you trust that person with your life.
Yes?
And you are saying that you have problems letting someone who you know and married have any measure of control over your life?
How does that work out?
Should I be wary of my wife lest she slips some poison into my food or drink?
Should I be worried that she awakes from sleep and suffocate me with a pillow?
My life is literally in her hands.
I don't trust any other woman, BUT I TRUST HER with my life.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Deejo said:


> It's like chumming the water ... but my intention isn't another feminist love-fest.
> 
> COguy's analogy of a dance is most appropriate. Men are supposed to lead in a dance ... and a man that can't, or won't, generally isn't considered a very good dancer.
> 
> But now? Even that harmless analogy is utterly loaded.
> 
> Never ceases to amaze me when you have the conversation with someone who get's it, versus someone that sees a completely different paradigm.
> 
> Submission is a choice, not a demand. It is a gift given by the submitter, not a thing to be taken by the recipient.
> 
> And THAT, is what makes it a loving gesture that imparts the desire for reciprocity, upon the one whom the gift is bestowed.
> 
> Let's face it, take reciprocity out of the equation and you don't have much of a relationship or marriage anyway.
> 
> But it's definitely more fun to fight and argue about it, I'll give you that.


You start a thread and then insult the women who disagree with the content? Carping and crowing feminist love fest? 

Yes, submission is a choice FOR HER and it works in her marriage and many others. In the much longer interview she said that Laird makes all the decisions and I do as he says. She stated that any woman who doesn't do this isn't a feminine woman. It is easy for a very public, world known, multi millionaire to say this because if things ever went south as in domestic violence/financial mishandling/all decision making taken away from her, she has options. For many other women though, this advice is dangerous and reckless.

As I have continued to say, this works for their marriage and it seems to be solid. I think it's great that they turned their marriage around and have a happy one. More power to her! She should have left it at that. When she dragged all women in this by insulting me with if you don't follow this model, turn in your vagina, well then she left herself open to criticism and all the backlash she is getting. 

There I go carping and crowing.


----------



## Shadow_Nirvana

always_alone said:


> It might be, given how damaged boys have become from trying to live up to the traditional notions of masculinity: Raising Cain: Protecting the Emotional Life of Boys http://www.amazon.ca/Raising-Cain-Protecting-Emotional-Life/dp/product-description/0345434854
> 
> It's really quite interesting how firmly men will cling to these stereotypes no matter how much damage it does them. And if a woman dares to challenge, she's just a rabid man-hater responsible for increasing divorce rates and societal malaise.


I can show loads more boys and men who haven't been raised to understand and use their masculinity and became damaged. Just glad I recovered my masculine power and took charge of my life and relationships. Also glad to see loads more men doing the same thing.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

Wiserforit said:


> I don't like the men vs. women framing any more than I like black vs. white or old vs. young, etc.
> 
> We're all just people. Individuals. Sure, there are biological differences and each of us plays different roles depending on whether you are at work, home, recreating, practicing your religion, or whatever.
> 
> But we have to solve our problems by working together as a team. The need to frame everything as a war between us is a terrible social legacy to leave unto the next generation. What a bad example we set for them if we do it this way.


:iagree:


----------



## COguy

Therealbrighteyes said:


> It is easy for a very public, world known, multi millionaire to say this because if things ever went south as in domestic violence/financial mishandling/all decision making taken away from her, she has options. For many other women though, this advice is dangerous and reckless.


Fear monger much??

Hidden behind every independent woman, is a man waiting to steal all his spouse's choices and beat her! Taking her captive while she has no other option! Don't be fooled! Never submit to these monsters!

The insanity is too much...I'm going to poop myself.


----------



## okeydokie

ScarletBegonias said:


> he's still a fantastic golfer  Although,I was happy to see the Aussie guy won.It would have been nice for Angel to win but it's so thrilling to see someone win for the very first time.


My point was that I think a lot of women see him as very alpha and dominant, a specimen


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

COguy said:


> Divorce rate is skyrocketing....cooincidence?


Actually it's not. It is at 42%, the lowest it has been since the 80's. The reason for that is people are marrying later in life after they figure themselves out and what they want in a partner. Also both sexes are foregoing marriage so that takes a chunk out of the equation.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> If you are a good enough lead, you will also be able to handle it if your follower pulls a back-lead on you.


:iagree:

Finally, we understand it.

My wife can at anytime , ask me to go get Hagan Daaz ice cream or any one of her favourite, irresistible urges , day or night.
I do anything for her.

She is the type of person when I call would drop whatever she's doing and respond to my need. 
So I respond to hers with the same SUBMISSION ,willingness, and speed.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

COguy said:


> Fear monger much??
> 
> Hidden behind every independent woman, is a man waiting to steal all his spouse's choices and beat her! Taking her captive while she has no other option! Don't be fooled! Never submit to these monsters!
> 
> The insanity is too much...I'm going to poop myself.


That isn't fear mongering, it's reality for many. Regardless if you believe it to be true, it happens to both sexes. Ever seen a guy screwed over by a male business partner because he wasn't paying attention to the books? I have. 
My point was, she stated that all women should behave like her in marriage to make it successful to which I say she should have said that behaving that way in HER marriage makes it successful. It certainly isn't universal and to suggest that if it isn't, we women aren't women is insulting.


----------



## Faithful Wife

I was also going to add...there is that saying, something like "Ginger Rodgers did everything Fred Astaire did, only backwards and in heels".

This is actually a rediculous statement. Following is so much easier than leading. Fred could easily have put on a pair of heels and followed any leader in any type of dance. He also could have put on heels and still lead!

Ginger was good but not even close to as good as Fred. She could not do what he did but he could do what she did.

Knowing this is part of why I decided to learn how to lead in dancing.

To be a GREAT dancer, you must learn both sides of the dynamic.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Therealbrighteyes said:


> That isn't fear mongering, it's reality for many. Regardless if you believe it to be true, it happens to both sexes. Ever seen a guy screwed over by a male business partner because he wasn't paying attention to the books? I have.
> My point was, she stated that all women should behave like her in marriage to make it successful to which I say she should have said that behaving that way in HER marriage makes it successful. It certainly isn't universal and to suggest that if it isn't, we women aren't women is insulting.


Do you think its ok at anytime in a marriage for a woman to submit?
Do you think its ok at anytime in a marriage for a man to submit?


----------



## BrockLanders

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Actually it's not. It is at 42%, the lowest it has been since the 80's. The reason for that is people are marrying later in life after they figure themselves out and what they want in a partner. Also both sexes are foregoing marriage so that takes a chunk out of the equation.


You're an optimist. I would have guessed that the reason for fewer divorces at this time is that people can't afford them anymore.

:lol:


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> To be a GREAT dancer, you must learn both sides of the dynamic.


:iagree:

It will be best if both men and women try to understand this.

A lot of women can't even begin to fathom the types of pressures exerted by society on men, simply because he's a man, so much misinformation and confusion.

A lot of men don't understand the negativity our society places on women if they don't meet a certain stand in many areas of their life.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

So a woman who hasn't led a feminist rally or staged a Sl*t Walk isn't a strong independant woman? She has no right to claim such since others before her have done so much more? LMAO
Nice try. 

Every woman can embrace feminist principles that she agrees with and reject those she doesn't. There are no hard and fast rules in asserting independance. Feminisim is all about choice, women being able to choose what makes them happy, rather than pigeon holed into little boxes because that is what makes MEN happy. 

Personally, I think women are much stronger than men, more suited to leadership roles and that the world would be a much more peaceful place were women to take control. 
But marriages are not corporations or ships or factories to be run by one person. They are *partnerships* My partner is not my leader. A leader cannot be my partner. The two are mutually exclusive.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## TCSRedhead

Caribbean Man said:


> And this part here ^^ is why some marriages work and others fail.
> When each partner submits 100% to each other's will, only then can a marriage work.
> That's why 50 / 50 can never work, because nobody wants to put their partner's will above theirs..
> But if both partners do it in a _reciprocal_ fashion , success is guaranteed.
> Reciprocal being the operative word here.
> 
> My wife has my back 100%
> I've got hers 100%


Liking this just wasn't enough. This topic seems to be replaying a LOT lately. Submitting to my husband works because he puts me first. So, I put his wishes first and he puts mine first and it works. I trust him and he trusts me. 

I can literally trace all problems we've had in our marriage to times where I stopped doing that.


----------



## Shadow_Nirvana

LadyOfTheLake said:


> Personally, I think women are much stronger than men, more suited to leadership roles and that the world would be a much more peaceful place were women to take control.


And this sums up a feminist mindset. And yes it is about equality. We will all be equal under female superiority. 

Just really glad your and you sisterhood's deluded ego and belief system doesn't really relate to any kind of truth.


----------



## Caribbean Man

BrockLanders said:


> You're an optimist. I would have guessed that the reason for fewer divorces at this time is that people can't afford them anymore.
> 
> :lol:


Actually divorce rates are falling because at this time in the USA , its cheaper to stay married.


----------



## Deejo

I think you are a very intelligent woman. I mean it shows. Despite the fact I don't always agree, it's apparent to me that you have thought about what you have to say.

But I'm sorry, this is a straw man.

People used to stay in those roles because it made their endeavor successful. Note, I didn't say happy. If it was a man and a woman on the farm with no other means to support one another and a family other than assuming roles and accepting the terms of those roles, that is what they did.

I don't want to get into the biology debacle, but lets agree on a very simple premise. Our biological imperative, THE biological imperative is to survive and reproduce. So ... people historically did what they needed to do to fulfill those imperatives.

Picture has changed a great deal. We have all of this free time to ruminate about our nature and conduct between men and women because survival has given way to leisure. Reproduction is a plan and a choice for the educated, a consequence for the less educated and young.

This is getting too lofty ... so I'll bottom line it.

I'm not interested in the gender debate, quite honestly. But ... we always seem to end up here.

I'm interested in what works. 
There is little argument that roles have shifted tremendously in the last 40 to 50 years. Aggressively so in the last 20. 
My position is that they have shifted too much. Boys shouldn't be raised like girls. Nor should girls be raised with the concept that they are inferior to, or subservient to men. That's just rhetoric bunk.

I don't want an EQUAL relationship and marriage. I want a loving one, a respectful one. I don't want to keep score. 

To be happy, we must admit women and men aren't 'equal' | Fox News

Point #2 sums it up perfectly, although I recommend reading the whole thing. It's a great piece, written by a woman.

Being submissive, or conciliatory, I don't care what we want to call it ... should be part of anyone that loves their partner and wants to serve their relationship, unless they don't see love as service at all. In that case, you likely have a whole lot of other, bigger, baggage.




always_alone said:


> It might be, given how damaged boys have become from trying to live up to the traditional notions of masculinity: Raising Cain: Protecting the Emotional Life of Boys: Amazon.ca: Dan Kindlon Ph.D., Michael Thompson Ph.D.: Books
> 
> It's really quite interesting how firmly men will cling to these stereotypes no matter how much damage it does them. And if a woman dares to challenge, she's just a rabid man-hater responsible for increasing divorce rates and societal malaise.
> 
> Traditional roles may work for some, but they don't work for all. And it's quite possible that they never did. People often got together and stayed in these traditional roles because they felt like they didn't have a choice -- not because they were happy.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Trenton said:


> Gross.


Yup.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Caribbean Man said:


> So generally you have a problem with a man leading?
> Yes?
> What about if a woman's leading, do you have a problem with that,
> or is that more acceptable to you?
> See?
> Therin lies the problem.
> That's why I'm saying that 50 / 50 BS CANNOT WORK!


For me, it is situational. Both my husband and I have our own strengths so depending on what they are, we take the lead. 

He doesn't want to handle our investments whatsoever. Given that I was a stockbroker/bond trader many years ago, he sees that this is more my strength than his, even though he has a degree in Economics and an MBA. He trusts me enough to know I am smart, capable and can make solid decisions. In return, I know that he is incredibly precise. His ability to plan things out to the finest and then have a backup plan is something I marvel at. He is a measure twice cut once kind of guy. I do not question him on this because he is always right, without fail.


----------



## Deejo

TCSRedhead said:


> Liking this just wasn't enough. This topic seems to be replaying a LOT lately. Submitting to my husband works because he puts me first. So, I put his wishes first and he puts mine first and it works. I trust him and he trusts me.
> 
> I can literally trace all problems we've had in our marriage to times where I stopped doing that.


Can't thank you enough for stepping up and posting that.


----------



## Wiserforit

I don't think we can compare divorce rates over the last couple of generations meaningfully.

Living together without marriage has become increasingly more common as society has changed and the social stigma of "living in sin" has waned.

An accurate comparison of what is going on with long term relationships is more appropriate. A lot of people marrying in their late 20's or into their 30's have already had long term live-in relationships that ended. We are also more accepting of gay/lesbian couples, who are only now beginning to marry. Soon polygamy will be accepted along with marrying your dog or perhaps a barnyard animal. A flock of pigeon, perhaps? 

So this is going to confound comparing statistics.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Possibly BOTH the men AND the women will hate me for saying this right here but...

Really, I think the men are talking about getting sex. And I don't disagree that sexually speaking, you men need to take the lead and f*ck our brains out. I think most women (not all) really want that.

Here's the biggest problem with it, though: Most men don't know how to do a proper sexual throw down.

There, I said it.

Some of you guys are reading the wrong books.

If your woman's eyes aren't rolling back in her head when you f*ck her, this is not the fault of feminism, of NG syndrome, or of anything other outside factor. It is the result of not knowing how to lead a good f*ck.

Please stop blaming women for this. We know how to get f*cked. Now learn your part.

(ducks and runs.....)


----------



## ScarletBegonias

Faithful Wife said:


> Possibly BOTH the men AND the women will hate me for saying this right here but...
> 
> Really, I think the men are talking about getting sex. And I don't disagree that sexually speaking, you men need to take the lead and f*ck our brains out. I think most women (not all) really want that.
> 
> Here's the biggest problem with it, though: Most men don't know how to do a proper sexual throw down.
> 
> There, I said it.
> 
> Some of you guys are reading the wrong books.
> 
> If your woman's eyes aren't rolling back in her head when you f*ck her, this is not the fault of feminism, of NG syndrome, or of anything other outside factor. It is the result of not knowing how to lead a good f*ck.
> 
> Please stop blaming women for this. We know how to get f*cked. Now learn your part.
> 
> (ducks and runs.....)


I like this post.Made me smile actually...that rarely happens around here for me


----------



## Deejo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> You start a thread and then insult the women who disagree with the content? Carping and crowing feminist love fest?


I apologize, I sincerely meant the comments appearing under the video, but I didn't convey that in my post at all. Never my goal to just inflame anyone here. Although it seems I've had a knack for it lately ...




Therealbrighteyes said:


> There I go carping and crowing.


Yeah, but it's ok when you, or the others here do it, because I have the benefit of knowing where many of you are coming from. 

Was going to say that it's cute when you do it, but imagined the virtual 3" heel to the groin it would have earned me.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Therealbrighteyes said:


> For me, it is situational. Both my husband and I have our own strengths so depending on what they are, we take the lead.
> 
> He doesn't want to handle our investments whatsoever. Given that I was a stockbroker/bond trader many years ago, he sees that this is more my strength than his, even though he has a degree in Economics and an MBA. He trusts me enough to know I am smart, capable and can make solid decisions. In return, I know that he is incredibly precise. His ability to plan things out to the finest and then have a backup plan is something I marvel at. He is a measure twice cut once kind of guy. I do not question him on this because he is always right, without fail.


Well then we are both saying the same thing!
There must be submission on both sides and it has to be reciprocal for it to work.


----------



## COguy

LadyOfTheLake said:


> Personally, I think women are much stronger than men, more suited to leadership roles and that the world would be a much more peaceful place were women to take control.


Do you have any facts or insight to back up your assertion?


----------



## Deejo

Faithful Wife said:


> Possibly BOTH the men AND the women will hate me for saying this right here but...
> 
> Really, I think the men are talking about getting sex. And I don't disagree that sexually speaking, you men need to take the lead and f*ck our brains out. I think most women (not all) really want that.
> 
> Here's the biggest problem with it, though: Most men don't know how to do a proper sexual throw down.
> 
> There, I said it.
> 
> Some of you guys are reading the wrong books.
> 
> If your woman's eyes aren't rolling back in her head when you f*ck her, this is not the fault of feminism, of NG syndrome, or of anything other outside factor. It is the result of not knowing how to lead a good f*ck.
> 
> Please stop blaming women for this. We know how to get f*cked. Now learn your part.
> 
> (ducks and runs.....)


Oh thank God ...

At least I'm doing something right.


----------



## TCSRedhead

I'm going to expound on what I posted earlier. 

At work, I am in a position of leadership. I am assertive, well spoken, educated and can influence the direction our company takes in many areas. I consider myself on par with my peers, male and female. I do consider that I 'submit' to my boss' will in making decisions and enforcing the outcomes. As previously stated, I do influence those decisions and contribute to the information and direction we are going. He makes decisions to help us reach our goals and for the betterment of the employees and shareholders.

Similarly at home, my husband takes that role. His goal is to see us happy, healthy and prepared for the future in the best way possible. 

Maybe I'm just lucky to be married to a man whom I trust to always place me first. Maybe he's lucky to be married to a woman who does the same for him.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> Most men don't know how to do a proper sexual throw down.



x 100%!

They don't know how to do the Tango or a hot Salsa.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Therealbrighteyes said:


> For me, it is situational. Both my husband and I have our own strengths so depending on what they are, we take the lead.
> 
> He doesn't want to handle our investments whatsoever. Given that I was a stockbroker/bond trader many years ago, he sees that this is more my strength than his, even though he has a degree in Economics and an MBA. He trusts me enough to know I am smart, capable and can make solid decisions.


This

My DH and each have our strengths. I suck at handling finances, he can't run a scedule. We both take the lead where our personal fortes allow. It equals out in the end.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## COguy

TCSRedhead said:


> Maybe I'm just lucky to be married to a man whom I trust to always place me first. Maybe he's lucky to be married to a woman who does the same for him.


You ma'am, are a gem, and we salute you.


----------



## Sanity

Faithful Wife said:


> Possibly BOTH the men AND the women will hate me for saying this right here but...
> 
> Really, I think the men are talking about getting sex. And I don't disagree that sexually speaking, you men need to take the lead and f*ck our brains out. I think most women (not all) really want that.
> 
> Here's the biggest problem with it, though: Most men don't know how to do a proper sexual throw down.
> 
> There, I said it.
> 
> Some of you guys are reading the wrong books.
> 
> If your woman's eyes aren't rolling back in her head when you f*ck her, this is not the fault of feminism, of NG syndrome, or of anything other outside factor. It is the result of not knowing how to lead a good f*ck.
> 
> Please stop blaming women for this. We know how to get f*cked. Now learn your part.
> 
> (ducks and runs.....)


Is it wrong that I got an erection after reading this?


----------



## Shadow_Nirvana

Sanity said:


> Is it wrong that I got an erection after reading this?


I came at the word "sex".


----------



## Wiserforit

TCSRedhead said:


> Maybe I'm just lucky to be married to a man whom I trust to always place me first. Maybe he's lucky to be married to a woman who does the same for him.


I say the same thing, but it is rhetorical. Clearly this is far and away the majority view here.

There is a minority of gender warriors for sure who cannot bear the thought of stating that they put their spouse first. Because that would be placing a woman ahead of a man or a man ahead of a woman. If you view yourself as a gender warrior first and foremost, you will never say such a thing.


----------



## Deejo

Sanity said:


> Is it wrong that I got an erection after reading this?


Off topic. Overshare. TMI ... Carry on.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Caribbean Man said:


> Do you think its ok at anytime in a marriage for a woman to submit?
> Do you think its ok at anytime in a marriage for a man to submit?


Oh yes. Without a doubt. My ire came from her later statement in the longer interview that she gives up all decision making to him and just shuts up about it. 

We all submit in some way. I know I do. I mentioned in a previous post that my husband is always a man with a plan, without fail. If that plan doesn't work, he has a backup. I like this. I know that in any situation he has some kind of thing in the works and it makes me happy. In turn, he knows I understand about investments. He doesn't question me on them and knows that I have a solid basis for my decisions. 

Life is a series of compromises. Case in point and kinda long so fair warning: Our eldest son dropped out of college. He got a partial scholarship to a baby Ivy league school and decided to leave, move in with his girlfriend and now works at Home Depot. It crushed my heart in so many ways. 

His room was as it stayed until my husband said we should turn it in to something else. I agreed and said I wanted a craft room as this would be "my" room. Our house has a man cave and everything else in the house is a compromise of furniture/color/decor, etc, so unlike many houses, it isn't solely a womans. Jon said sure, let's do it. He said he wanted a media room for us to watch movies. We butted heads for a bit but both of us understood the other. 

I left to go to San Diego to see a dear friend and while I was gone I couldn't help but wonder how this room would all turn out. I was gone for 8 days. 

When I got back, he ushered me in to the room telling me to close my eyes. When I opened them, it was a wonder of awesomeness. This room had 3 black walls for glare and 1 white, a gorgeous sofa and club chairs. An amazing curtain over the window and about $10k in electronic equipment. He had purchased a $6k rear projector, our speakers were mounted next to the sofa and piped in through the room and our screen was the white 380 inch wall. When he turned the sound on, my vagina vibrated. It is loud and too cool! He then showed me my craft room. It was the closet of the previous bedroom only he knocked down the wall between the other closet we never used and made the two one. It was 14 x 14 now and decorated it with every single thing I could ever want. New sewing machine, new table, new everything. He must have spent a fortune and given I do the finances, I know he did. It is BEAUTIFUL and I just love every single thing about it. 

My husband called over our eldest to see what we did with his room. He came over marveled at it and said how incredible it was. Three days later he said he wanted to go back to college because he knows that none of this will be possible on a Home Depot wage. 

A man with a plan.


----------



## Shadow_Nirvana

Top drawer.


----------



## okeydokie

Faithful Wife said:


> Possibly BOTH the men AND the women will hate me for saying this right here but...
> 
> Really, I think the men are talking about getting sex. And I don't disagree that sexually speaking, you men need to take the lead and f*ck our brains out. I think most women (not all) really want that.
> 
> Here's the biggest problem with it, though: Most men don't know how to do a proper sexual throw down.
> 
> There, I said it.
> 
> Some of you guys are reading the wrong books.
> 
> If your woman's eyes aren't rolling back in her head when you f*ck her, this is not the fault of feminism, of NG syndrome, or of anything other outside factor. It is the result of not knowing how to lead a good f*ck.
> 
> Please stop blaming women for this. We know how to get f*cked. Now learn your part.
> 
> (ducks and runs.....)


i expect my wife to take an equal role and throw me down and make my eyes roll back, but that never happens


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Deejo said:


> I apologize, I sincerely meant the comments appearing under the video, but I didn't convey that in my post at all. Never my goal to just inflame anyone here. Although it seems I've had a knack for it lately ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, but it's ok when you, or the others here do it, because I have the benefit of knowing where many of you are coming from.
> 
> Was going to say that it's cute when you do it, but imagined the virtual 3" heel to the groin it would have earned me.


I don't disagree with Gabby in any way because it worked in her marriage. Why on Earth would I mock a woman who said this is what helped keep their family together? We all seek to find our balance and what helps a relationship. 
As I continue to say, my ire came from her saying this is what *should *work in all relationships and if it doesn't you are not a real woman.


----------



## Shadow_Nirvana

coffee4me said:


> She says here that we don't worry about men having it all, so Men can have a successful career and home life but women can't? I just don't agree with the fact that women have to choose. She had to choose, it doesn't work for her. For me, I think it's possible to have both with the right partner.


Can you really have it all if you are married and have kids? Can you have as succesful as a career like you were single and childless?


----------



## T&T

coffee4me said:


> I think it's possible to have both with the right partner


Agreed, but many women come home and are expected to do EVERYTHING around the house too, which never works. 

The male gender role has changed and IMHO many men don't like or won't do enough to keep everything in check. Hence, the problems begin...

My wife hasn't cooked a meal in months. I've done all the cooking, laundry and house keeping.

Why? Because *she's frigging busy as hell* and I'm not ATM. I enjoy seeing her less stressed and able to focus 100% on whats she's doing right now. It's important to her! 

By supporting her she supports me when needed. Simple really...Side benefits, she has more spare time, which equals SEX. We're able to keep things in check and our relationship doesn't suffer. Am I submissive? Don't care, it works and when I'm in need she will be there. That, I can count on!


----------



## Deejo

coffee4me said:


> She says here that we don't worry about men having it all, so Men can have a successful career and home life but women can't? I just don't agree with the fact that women have to choose. She had to choose, it doesn't work for her. For me, I think it's possible to have both with the right partner.
> 
> Plus, many women do not have the luxury of choice, they must contribute financially to the household.


I see that as depending upon the interpretation of the listener.
I took it as we never make it a point of consideration about men at all. It flat-out isn't part of the vernacular.
We want men to be good providers, good partners, and good fathers. It's an expectation, not a brass ring. And as these forums will attest, being super earner, super dad, super husband, and super lover is like trying to juggle live cats.

Women apply 'having it all' to other women. The concept isn't even on men's radar. Which no doubt, those concerned with score keeping may see as an issue in and of itself.

I want to serve my relationship. I very much want to serve my marriage, should I ever make that choice again. Actually feel far more capable of doing so now, than I did when I was married previously. Shame that.


----------



## nice777guy

Caribbean Man said:


> The act of sexual intercourse is in a self an act of submission on the part of a woman, but she must first desire to submit.


How so?


----------



## Faithful Wife

"i expect my wife to take an equal role and throw me down and make my eyes roll back, but that never happens."

So who do you blame for this, then?

The same is true in my marriage. I know how to do a proper throw down, and if I didn't my husband would not have married me. If I didn't continue to do it, he would leave me. He would not be whining about how his wife doesn't give good f*ck, wondering "who should I blame for this?"


----------



## Caribbean Man

Therealbrighteyes said:


> We all submit in some way. I know I do. I mentioned in a previous post that *my husband is always a man with a plan, without fail. If that plan doesn't work, he has a backup.*
> 
> Life is a series of compromises.


:iagree:
I like your entire post, but this part made me laugh.
See my wife tells me " You're the man with the plan, proceed.."

Nut when my plan fails , she pokes fun and laughs at me!
And then we both laugh...
Haha!:rofl:
I love her still.
That's why I said in my first post that a man must first prove himself worthy of respect from his wife if he wants to lead.....


Just like Faithful Wife said,he must learn to " dance " FIRST before he take a woman's hand.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

nice777guy said:


> How so?


Exactly.

I'm not sexually submitting to my husband. I don't do anything I don't want to do. In fact, I'm usually shouting instructions 

I welcome him, invite him, to share my body. I'm not laying there letting him use it while I check out. Just as he is sharing his body, his energy with me, I am sharing mine with him. Neither of us is submitting to or dominating the other.


----------



## Caribbean Man

nice777guy said:


> How so?


Before you insert any appendage of your body into any orifice of a woman, she must first say " yes" either verbally or by innuendo according to law...

Lots of guys behind bars because somehow they got confused when she said NO....


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Faithful Wife said:


> Really, I think the men are talking about getting sex. And I don't disagree that sexually speaking, you men need to take the lead and f*ck our brains out. I think most women* (not all)* really want that.
> 
> 
> T


Just wanted to emphasize the bolded part.........


----------



## Caribbean Man

LadyOfTheLake said:


> Exactly.
> 
> I'm not sexually submitting to my husband. I don't do anything I don't want to do. In fact, I'm usually shouting instructions
> 
> I welcome him, invite him, to share my body. I'm not laying there letting him use it while I check out. Just as he is sharing his body, his energy with me, I am sharing mine with him. Neither of us is submitting to or dominating the other.


How many female dominant positions do you know exist in coitus, as compared to male?
Has any man ever said to you " f..k me harder " during sex?

See?

You submitting to him gives him pleasure.
Your body's submissive response to his sexual aggression turns him on.
[_That is why rapist cannot be cured or fixed.,their wires are badly crossed._]

Him dominating you gives you pleasure.
Without his aggression [ thrusting or pushing] , he becomes passive and neither of you can achieve orgasm. It is the way we are biologically wired.


----------



## Wiserforit

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Oh yes. Without a doubt. My ire came from her later statement in the longer interview that she gives up all decision making to him and just shuts up about it.


Could you cite the exact source for this and where she says it? 

I think this an overstatement or out of context. 

All decisionmaking? No input whatsoever? I doubt that.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Lady....even though on your own thread, you said this: "But for me it only feels good if he is going hard and fast. I don't like it slow, doesn't do anything for me."


----------



## okeydokie

Faithful Wife said:


> "i expect my wife to take an equal role and throw me down and make my eyes roll back, but that never happens."
> 
> So who do you blame for this, then?
> 
> The same is true in my marriage. I know how to do a proper throw down, and if I didn't my husband would not have married me. If I didn't continue to do it, he would leave me. He would not be whining about how his wife doesn't give good f*ck, wondering "who should I blame for this?"


It's not my fault, she howls like lassie when I lay it to her, well she used to.......I think she may be complacent


----------



## Faithful Wife

okeydokie...Her being complacent has much to do with you. Sorry to tell you that.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Faithful Wife said:


> Lady....even though on your own thread, you said this: "But for me it only feels good if he is going hard and fast. I don't like it slow, doesn't do anything for me."


Yes. 

But by sexual "throw down" I thought you meant taking a woman against her will.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Oh god no....not at all. It is *MY WILL* to get my brains f*cked out regularly.

I'd dump him if he didn't or couldn't do it.


----------



## okeydokie

Faithful Wife said:


> okeydokie...Her being complacent has much to do with you. Sorry to tell you that.


Oh, ok, I have failed I guess. Glad you figured it out

So menopause/hormones and all those other excuses aren't it? It's me

My point was I am all for total gender equality, but that means total, not pick and choose


----------



## Faithful Wife

No spouse who knows their spouse will leave them is complacent.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Wiserforit said:


> Could you cite the exact source for this and where she says it?
> 
> I think this an overstatement or out of context.
> 
> All decisionmaking? No input whatsoever? I doubt that.


Wahahahahaha. As you said to plenty of other men trying to prove your own masculinity, Google it.


----------



## Wiserforit

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Wahahahahaha. As you said to plenty of other men trying to prove your own masculinity, Google it.


As I thought. She didn't say what you claim.


----------



## Giro flee

Submissive is a term I just don't understand. In what ways do men want women to be submissive? Never disagree? Is that even possible? Just say yes dear to anything a husband wants? I guess I just don't see where my husband would want me to be submissive in our lives. Anybody have daily examples of how I would do this?


----------



## tacoma

Faithful Wife said:


> No spouse who knows their spouse will leave them is complacent.


Isn't that game playing?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Tacoma, really? Or just being facetous?

I call it Radical Honesty. F*ck me regular, or see you in divorce court. No games, no tricks, I wear it on my sleeve.


----------



## tacoma

Faithful Wife said:


> Tacoma, really? Or just being facetous?


The latter.

I happen to agree with your statement and think it's an important part of my marriage.

It's tough to joke around in this place.

:scratchhead:


----------



## Faithful Wife

I just didn't know if you were being facetous or not because so many things ended up being called "game" in that other thread, I thought maybe I missed "f*ck me regular" as being "game", too.


----------



## TCSRedhead

coffee4me said:


> Red I agree with what you are saying here but the problem that I have with what Gabby is saying is that she is saying as women we have to choose. You cannot have a career and a good marriage.
> 
> Gabby said:
> 
> 
> She says here that we don't worry about men having it all, so Men can have a successful career and home life but women can't? I just don't agree with the fact that women have to choose. She had to choose, it doesn't work for her. For me, I think it's possible to have both with the right partner.
> 
> Plus, many women do not have the luxury of choice, they must contribute financially to the household.


I actually agree with her on most of this. We can't have it all as successfully as people portray. I have to draw hard and fast lines about where work ends to make my marriage successful which means that I don't achieve what some of my peers who are single or willing to overlap personal/business time on a continual basis. 

As a submissive wife, if my husband asked me to give up my career and focus on being a wife and mother, I would do that to please him. We've talked about it before and he recognizes the fulfillment I get from my career and thus hasn't asked that of me.


----------



## nice777guy

Faithful Wife said:


> F*ck me regular, or see you in divorce court. No games, no tricks, I wear it on my sleeve.


I thought sex - by its nature - required women to be submissive.

So - are you demanding to be submissive???

In which case - you aren't really submissive... 

:scratchhead:


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

I just heard this song on the radio and it reminded me of this thread.

I think this woman would scare the brown stuff out of the guys in this thread LOL

"Short Skirt / Long Jacket" Cake

I want a girl with a mind like a diamond
I want a girl who knows what's best
I want a girl with shoes that cut
And eyes that burn like cigarettes

I want a girl with the right allocations
Who's fast and thorough
And sharp as a tack
She's playing with her jewelry
She's putting up her hair
She's touring the facility
And picking up slack

I want a girl with a short skirt and a lonnnng jacket......

I want a girl who gets up early
I want a girl who stays up late
I want a girl with uninterrupted prosperity
Who uses a machete to cut through red tape
With fingernails that shine like justice
And a voice that is dark like tinted glass

She is fast and thorough
And sharp as a tack
She's touring the facility
And picking up slack

I want a girl with a short skirt and a lonnnnng.... lonnng jacket

I want a girl with a smooth liquidation
I want a girl with good dividends
At Citibank we will meet accidentally
We'll start to talk when she borrows my pen

She wants a car with a cupholder arm rest
She wants a car that will get her there
She's changing her name from Kitty to Karen
She's trading her MG for a white Chrysler La Baron

I want a girl with a short skirt and a lonnnnggggggggg jacket

Short Skirt Long Jacket by Cake - YouTube


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Wiserforit said:


> As I thought. She didn't say what you claim.


No, I am not going to do your work for you. A simple Google search will net the results. You are a man who wants citations, mocks men who don't provide the exact data you want and yet have never on this board provided a single ounce of research to support your own. You just call men here losers and women ball busting fem whatever. It just says so, so much more about you.


----------



## Faithful Wife

No clue what you are getting at NiceGuy.


----------



## nice777guy

Faithful Wife said:


> No clue what you are getting at NiceGuy.


Maybe I'm off here - do you agree that sex is a submissive act for women?

If so (and that may be where I'm off) - how can you be submissive if you are the one who is *demanding* the action?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Because I'm a huge wh*re. I thought that much was obvious?


----------



## nice777guy

Faithful Wife said:


> Because I'm a huge wh*re. I thought that much was obvious?


Ok...back up...

Do you feel that sex a submissive act for women - generally speaking?


----------



## tacoma

Faithful Wife said:


> I just didn't know if you were being facetous or not because so many things ended up being called "game" in that other thread, I thought maybe I missed "f*ck me regular" as being "game", too.


No, actually making your spouse 'know" you'll divorce if not happy is part of the "game" we discussed in that thread.


----------



## nice777guy

Bottom line - if it works, it works.


----------



## tacoma

nice777guy said:


> Bottom line - if it works, it works.


But if I have to tell my wife to dominate me it really takes away from the whole submissive gig for me.

Kind of outside the spirit of the whole thing really.


----------



## Wiserforit

Therealbrighteyes said:


> No, I am not going to do your work for you. A simple Google search will net the results. You are a man who wants citations, mocks men who don't provide data and yet have never on this board provided a single ounce of data/research to support your own.


You've already done more work trying to evade accountability than it would have required to prove your assertion. 

That's pretty strong proof you are making it up.


----------



## Faithful Wife

NiceGuy: No, I think sex is a sexual act.

Then there are some specific acts which are submissive and some which are not.

The throw down I'm talking about is not a submissive act.

But if you need to get technical then when people say PIV is a submissive act, this is only because a woman has to "agree" to it or else it is called rape.

That is not how "submissive" is used in sexual terms, however.

In sexual terms, I would be called a "switch". Sometimes I'm on top, sometimes on bottom. Sometimes neither of us is on top or bottom, we're both just making love.

He submits to me sexually sometimes, when the mood strikes.

Would I divorce over no sex? Hell yes.

He would divorce me, too.

We would both also divorce if the sex wasn't all we desired...we're both pretty sexual and have unusual needs.

Does that answer you?


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Wiserforit said:


> You've already done more work trying to evade accountability than it would have required to prove your assertion.
> 
> That's pretty strong proof you are making it up.


I already stated in the longer interview from Brian Williams that Deejo referenced. I didn't make it up, you just can't read apparently, or listen or bother to look up anything. 

As did most smart men here, set to ignore.


----------



## nice777guy

Faithful Wife said:


> NiceGuy: No, I think sex is a sexual act.
> 
> Then there are some specific acts which are submissive and some which are not.
> 
> The throw down I'm talking about is not a submissive act.
> 
> But if you need to get technical then when people say PIV is a submissive act, this is only because a woman has to "agree" to it or else it is called rape.
> 
> That is not how "submissive" is used in sexual terms, however.
> 
> In sexual terms, I would be called a "switch". Sometimes I'm on top, sometimes on bottom. Sometimes neither of us is on top or bottom, we're both just making love.
> 
> He submits to me sexually sometimes, when the mood strikes.
> 
> Would I divorce over no sex? Hell yes.
> 
> He would divorce me, too.
> 
> We would both also divorce if the sex wasn't all we desired...we're both pretty sexual and have unusual needs.
> 
> Does that answer you?


Works for me...


----------



## Wiserforit

Therealbrighteyes said:


> I already stated in the longer interview from Brian Williams that Deejo referenced. I didn't make it up, you just can't read apparently, or listen.
> 
> As did most smart men here, set to ignore.


Heh. Ad Hominems and then running away. Pretty powerful argument. 

And look how the story changes too - I wouldn't need to look it up in google if it was in the original interview. I listened to that and did not hear her saying he made ALL the decisions and that she SHUTS UP. 

This was obviously a straw man argument - pretending she said something she did not - in order to "disagree" with her.


----------



## nice777guy

tacoma said:


> But if I have to tell my wife to dominate me it really takes away from the whole submissive gig for me.
> 
> Kind of outside the spirit of the whole thing really.


Lol!!!

Wondering - would it turn any of you ladies off if a guy ever said "fvck me harder"???


----------



## Faithful Wife

"would it turn any of you ladies off if a guy ever said "fvck me harder"???"

A regular occurance in my house.


----------



## tacoma

nice777guy said:


> Lol!!!
> 
> Wondering - would it turn any of you ladies off if a guy ever said "fvck me harder"???


I've said it,she doesn't seem to have a problem with it.
Dammit if I want it harder how else am I gonna get it?

Don't really see it as submissive, kinda dominating actually.

Now "Do you think you could, maybe, please,please **** me just a tiny bit harder honey? please?

That's a bit submissive.


----------



## TiggyBlue

tacoma said:


> I've said it,she doesn't seem to have a problem with it.
> Dammit if I want it harder how else am I gonna get it?
> 
> Don't really see it as submissive, kinda dominating actually.


That's how I feel about it, never makes me feel submissive... I say, he does lol


----------



## always_alone

Deejo said:


> But I'm sorry, this is a straw man.
> 
> People used to stay in those roles because it made their endeavor successful. Note, I didn't say happy. If it was a man and a woman on the farm with no other means to support one another and a family other than assuming roles and accepting the terms of those roles, that is what they did.
> 
> I don't want to get into the biology debacle, but lets agree on a very simple premise. Our biological imperative, THE biological imperative is to survive and reproduce. So ... people historically did what they needed to do to fulfill those imperatives.
> 
> Picture has changed a great deal. We have all of this free time to ruminate about our nature and conduct between men and women because survival has given way to leisure. Reproduction is a plan and a choice for the educated, a consequence for the less educated and young.
> 
> This is getting too lofty ... so I'll bottom line it.
> 
> I'm not interested in the gender debate, quite honestly. But ... we always seem to end up here.
> 
> I'm interested in what works.
> There is little argument that roles have shifted tremendously in the last 40 to 50 years. Aggressively so in the last 20.
> My position is that they have shifted too much. Boys shouldn't be raised like girls. Nor should girls be raised with the concept that they are inferior to, or subservient to men. That's just rhetoric bunk.
> 
> I don't want an EQUAL relationship and marriage. I want a loving one, a respectful one. I don't want to keep score.


Yes, I agree! Let's look at what works.

The man and woman on the farm picture you've drawn is only from the recent past. Before that extended families were the norm, and roles were divided accordingly. Go back a bit further and you'll find that there just aren't clearly demarcated gender roles. Both women and men fulfilled the tasks of survival: hunting, butchering, cooking, building shelters, creating tools, practicing the healing arts, providing spiritual advising and so on. 

So, if we look to history and culture, we find that a lot of different things work. And that equality between the sexes isn't a new idea, and not just a result of having too much time to think or start stupid fights about who is doing the housework.

The argument for equality is not about keeping score. It is about resisting being confined to a little box where you are told in advance what your role is, your strengths are, what you are able to contribute based solely on stereotypes about your gender.

The argument for equality is also not about refusing acts of service for your partner, nor is it an unwillingness to go to great lengths to meet the needs of your spouse. It is a demand for recognition that forcing people into being and acting in ways that go against their grain, just because of some arbitrary stereotype of how things should be, is a colossal mistake that will serve no end, but to generate more unhappiness and marital strife.

Does this mean war? I don't think so because I don't think partnership obliterates the sense that marriage is a team aiming at the same goals. Rather, it enhances that feeling by encouraging consensus building.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

always_alone said:


> Yes, I agree! Let's look at what works.
> 
> The man and woman on the farm picture you've drawn is only from the recent past. Before that extended families were the norm, and roles were divided accordingly. Go back a bit further and you'll find that there just aren't clearly demarcated gender roles. Both women and men fulfilled the tasks of survival: hunting, butchering, cooking, building shelters, creating tools, practicing the healing arts, providing spiritual advising and so on.
> 
> So, if we look to history and culture, we find that a lot of different things work. And that equality between the sexes isn't a new idea, and not just a result of having too much time to think or start stupid fights about who is doing the housework.
> 
> The argument for equality is not about keeping score. It is about resisting being confined to a little box where you are told in advance what your role is, your strengths are, what you are able to contribute based solely on stereotypes about your gender.
> 
> The argument for equality is also not about refusing acts of service for your partner, nor is it an unwillingness to go to great lengths to meet the needs of your spouse. It is a demand for recognition that forcing people into being and acting in ways that go against their grain, just because of some arbitrary stereotype of how things should be, is a colossal mistake that will serve no end, but to generate more unhappiness and marital strife.
> 
> Does this mean war? I don't think so because I don't think partnership obliterates the sense that marriage is a team aiming at the same goals. Rather, it enhances that feeling by encouraging consensus building.


Nailed it.


----------



## Caribbean Man

nice777guy said:


> Maybe I'm off here - do you agree that sex is a submissive act for women?
> 
> If so (and that may be where I'm off) - how can you be submissive if you are the one who is *demanding* the action?


Because ,it's all part of " the dance "

"..._I took nothing for granted but I wished I could stay all night
And as we walked in to her place she reached out to dim the light
She said, "Dance with me darlin' 'til the moon and the stars retire."
It's just a vertical expression of horizontal desire._..."

Vertical Expression. Bellamy Brothers.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

My husband is 6'3", 42, a body of Adonis, Jesus abs, full head of hair, Mensa member, killer smile, wicked humor, wealthy and loyal beyond belief to me and his friends. If you manage to get within his inner circle, you are there forever and he would lay down his life for you. In return, he expects honesty and loyalty. 

He married me because I am sexy, funny, smart, speak my mind, stand up for what I believe in, take up for others and will never back down on what I value.That's what he loves about me. 

So earlier I asked him if he wanted a submissive wife as in the topic kind of way. His response: As if I don't have enough to deal with? I married you BECAUSE you are my equal and you have hot tits. We [email protected] in the hot tub before he had to get on a work call.


----------



## Caribbean Man

always_alone said:


> The argument for equality is not about keeping score. It is about resisting being confined to a little box where you are told in advance what your role is, your strengths are, what you are able to contribute based solely on stereotypes about your gender.
> 
> The argument for equality is also not about refusing acts of service for your partner, nor is it an unwillingness to go to great lengths to meet the needs of your spouse. It is a demand for recognition that forcing people into being and acting in ways that go against their grain, just because of some arbitrary stereotype of how things should be, is a colossal mistake that will serve no end, but to generate more unhappiness and marital strife.


I'm sorry.
But when these types of arguments entered our marriage, we decided it was time for professional , outside help.
That was 15 years ago.

I didn't get married to argue about " equality."
I got married because I was in love with my wife and felt that we could be happy and have a good life together.

IMO, whenever these types of power struggles and arguments arise, when we begin " counting " who does what and gives how much,whenever lines are drawn in the sand, the marriage is finished.

Today we are in a much better place, where I cook ,do the dishes and the laundry because I love doing it. I hate house cleaning, but when she's doing it I still help her out, and if she sees the dishes in the sink at bedtime and I'm not home, she does it.

Equality comes in our service to each other.
We serve each other because we are equals.
This is what works for us.


----------



## Wiserforit

always_alone said:


> equality between the sexes isn't a new idea, and not just a result of having too much time to think or start stupid fights about who is doing the housework.


Exactly. 

And since a woman said it, even the gender war groupies who have insisted all prior history is men oppressing women are going to agree to it.

More generally even a King as presumably an absolute sovereign still retained his authority under the Social Compact that his rule was nevertheless subject to the will of the people.

The fact someone worked and someone stayed at home says zero about who has "power".


----------



## Deejo

coffee4me said:


> Is it considered score keeping to say that a man is not asked to choose between career and family and therefore a woman should not be told she has to choose?


Absolutely not. 

There is a greeting card or a t-shirt in there somewhere regarding the cat juggling thing.


----------



## Deejo

always_alone said:


> Yes, I agree! Let's look at what works.
> 
> The man and woman on the farm picture you've drawn is only from the recent past. Before that extended families were the norm, and roles were divided accordingly. Go back a bit further and you'll find that there just aren't clearly demarcated gender roles. Both women and men fulfilled the tasks of survival: hunting, butchering, cooking, building shelters, creating tools, practicing the healing arts, providing spiritual advising and so on.
> 
> So, if we look to history and culture, we find that a lot of different things work. And that equality between the sexes isn't a new idea, and not just a result of having too much time to think or start stupid fights about who is doing the housework.
> 
> The argument for equality is not about keeping score. It is about resisting being confined to a little box where you are told in advance what your role is, your strengths are, what you are able to contribute based solely on stereotypes about your gender.
> 
> The argument for equality is also not about refusing acts of service for your partner, nor is it an unwillingness to go to great lengths to meet the needs of your spouse. It is a demand for recognition that forcing people into being and acting in ways that go against their grain, just because of some arbitrary stereotype of how things should be, is a colossal mistake that will serve no end, but to generate more unhappiness and marital strife.
> 
> Does this mean war? I don't think so because I don't think partnership obliterates the sense that marriage is a team aiming at the same goals. Rather, it enhances that feeling by encouraging consensus building.


I submit. :smnotworthy:


----------



## Deejo

Trenton said:


> Funny. Reading this thread I realized my biggest problem. I'm just busy being myself and expect the same from my partner. Imagine that.
> 
> I think the thread is negging, flat out negging.
> 
> Yes, a woman has to submit for a man to have sex with her. Either that or feel nothing and resign herself to this idea that the body doesn't mean as much as her brain. Both are an option.
> 
> You're in a sexless marriage? Imagine that every time she submits to your physical needs, what's she really doing is vacating her body to tolerate your penis inside of her. Been there, done that...lose all respect for the man in the process.
> 
> Imagine instead that you're in a sex filled marriage that has nothing to do with submission or dominance and rather is about connection because that is what sex is really about when you get it right and then it's something that lingers with you for days, causes butterflies in your stomach upon thinking about it (even after 19 years of being with the same, sole partner), and renews your faith in your partnership. Yes, there's still room for a good f'ing now and then and I've been known to say, "Harder!" but is that really being submissive? Issuing a command that he happily obliges? On what planet? Quite honestly, even if I have it totally backwards and it is submission. I don't give a crap.
> 
> Is the plug dominating the socket? I mean really? One without the other is pretty useless. I'm really sick of feeling as if I'm fighting with enemies when the fact that we're still having to fight means everyone's losing. It's so stupid.
> 
> Being in a relationship so caught up in norms and stereotypes and expectations is seriously flawed and hinders the beauty of what that connection is capable of.


And that is why, there will always be pockets requiring dry macaroni.


----------



## Caribbean Man

coffee4me said:


> Is it considered score keeping to say that a man is not asked to choose between career and family and therefore a woman should not be told she has to choose?


I think that when these type of arguments start in a marriage, the end is near.
Politics has no place in a marriage, marriages are way too personal for that.
If two people are compatible, compromises would be made that benefits both parties.
Am I an idealist?
A woman is " forced " to abandon her career and become a SAHM, becomes resentful....Marriage in trouble.

A man is " forced " to abandon his career and become a SAHD, becomes resentful.....Marriage in trouble.

So what is the politically correct position?
There is NONE, because politics has no place in marriage.

Lets suppose I decided to keep score and demand 50 / 50 from my wife. That would automatically mean that every morning she would have to awake at 4.00AM and not sleep till whenever because I'm an early riser, I start working early. She stays in bed till whenever.
It would also mean that I would be " entitled" to at least two holiday trips with my guy friends every year to some destination whilst she stays home.
My point is that there can be no one size fits all approach to the issue of 
" equality " in a marriage. Even if a spouse is being treated as an equal ,discontent could and would still arise because " equality " is a relative term in any given capacity.
People outside of your marriage cannot tell you how equality should apply to your marriage, only the two of you can know that.

I personally feel that whenever scores are being kept, the marriage is technically over, from what I've seen over and over.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> Is the plug dominating the socket? I mean really? One without the other is pretty useless.


The plug cannot dominate a socket, both are inanimate objects, they don't have a will. 
Submission involves the will , someone can dominate you against your will.

That's the beauty of love , marriage and sex.
Each partner _willingly submits _to each other, in various instances as the need arises.
I don't think that two people could really " connect " outside of both submitting to each other's will in some degree.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> Do the semantics matter CM? Really? If they do, why?


Because they are NOT semantics.
They are wisdom ,like a grain of sand that lodges itself in an oyster and irritates it until a beautiful pearl is formed....

Two people cannot bond unless they agree. 
There can be no agreement if one or both does not submit.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> Is your stance that both men and women need to submit and be dominant?


Would you consider yourself a passive or dominant person?


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> Depends. I'm capable of being both.


And THAT'S the point.
Its called human nature.
That's why at different times, one or both partners MUST submit to each other. Without submission, they would both keep going at each other's throat.

You have five fingers on your hand,are any of them dominant?
Is any side of your brain dominant?
What about your hands and legs , are you ambidextrous?


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> So your answer is yes...in a relationship partners will be both dominant and submissive, correct? I hate to put words in your mouth but you need to help me out here with a straight answer.


I have been saying that for the entire thread.

You have two legs , but one is dominant.
You have five fingers but two are dominant.
You have two sides of your brain, but one is dominant.
Yet they are all equal in their function TOGETHER, because if you loose your thumb , index finger ,or any appendage or body part, life becomes very difficult.
One body part does not fight the other part and demand equality. They function as ONE UNIT.

Go into a marriage seeking equality you will never find it.
Go into a marriage with a clear vision and equality would'nt even be an issue.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> You lose me at the body part scenario because we are not body parts. Those body parts are nothing without the brain. Just as my analogy fell short, so does yours.
> 
> Does anyone really enter a relationship seeking equality? I can't reconcile with this.
> 
> We are very different people CM. My experience is that if your clear vision is not open to contortion then it may not be achievable, fall short of expectations, or be found out to be completely wrong.
> 
> I like to think it is a better choice to go into a relationship committed, flexible, willing, and sincere. This is how I go into anything that I take on.


1]If you are right handed , your right hand is dominant. It is the brain that gives it commands and makes it dominant!
Can you sign your name with any hand?

2] I never said MY vision. Two people go into a marriage with a clear vision. Again , according to your life experience ,things may change, and yet still one or both partner WILL have to submit.

3]You can be committed , flexible, willing and sincere, in fact most couples who get married are, but if you BOTH don't know where you want the marriage to go, or a clear vision, it goes no where.


----------



## amanda1959

no one is submitting here lol


----------



## tacoma

Trenton said:


> Submit to me and I will give you salvation.
> 
> Amen.


Damn, I was hoping for Skittles.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

At least have the guts to say you wanted this to be an argument and gender divide, Deejo. While you mocked women for speaking up and calling them whatever for disagreeing with you, okay. My husband read this entire thread and said that no good could come out of it and only an agenda, yours, for whatever reason it is what this thread is about. It is to tee up every guy here, that's your entire purpose.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> 3) Is there really something wrong with both being willing to go where it takes them? Is it possible that there's not just one correct way but rather a presumption that the way we have chosen must be right?
> 
> 4) Are we even still on topic?


It is a mixture of a whole lot of things, and yes each marriage is different. That's why this whole 50 / 50 concept cannot work. Each marriage has its own dynamics.
You can be dominant in your marriage and your husband passive to a degree that creates the " correct balance." Applyin outside rules carte blanche would offset that balance.
So whether its a pitter patter, mountain of dreams , clear vision or whatever, the base ingredients are love and submission.
The act of marriage is submission.
Reread your vows, 
You now belong to your husband, and he belongs to you.

He is *your* husband.
You are *his* wife.

Of course we're on topic!


----------



## tacoma

Trenton said:


> I can arrange that but first you must submit.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> his last sentence which I will always remember was, *"I will love you always and support you." This was/is endearing. *
> .


And this ^^^is also submissive.


----------



## tacoma

C'mon CM do it, you know you want to.

There's Skittles in it for ya!!


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> Talking to you is very frustrating! Why not just submit to me and my ideals? It'll make you feel good.


The only woman I'll ever submit to is my wife!

And if we should ever part ways, I'll never submit that much to any other woman again....


----------



## Caribbean Man

tacoma said:


> C'mon CM do it, you know you want to.
> 
> There's Skittles in it for ya!!


I don't eat skittles, my wife has a jumbo pack in the refrigerator, yuck!
But I have a weakness for chocolates!


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> Never say never. Life is busy making plans for us.


You're hijacking the thread Trenton!


----------



## tacoma

Caribbean Man said:


> You're hijacking the thread Trenton!


Oh sure, "Trenton's" highjacking the thread.

Every thread the two of you end up in is jacked somewhere along the way.


----------



## tacoma

Trenton said:


> He doesn't seem like a Skittles man. I'm thinking I have to offer something more intrinsic like the secret to life. You want Skittles, I love that because I can purchase them in bulk on Amazon and get them delivered in two days with Amazon Prime. :rofl:


I'm ready!!


----------



## amanda1959

OMG! stop!


----------



## amanda1959

he is scary i would never submit to that!


----------



## tacoma

I think he's submissive.

I always figure whoever is licking the Skittle is in the submissive position.

Usually, maybe..


----------



## Deejo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> At least have the guts to say you wanted this to be an argument and gender divide, Deejo. While you mocked women for speaking up and calling them whatever for disagreeing with you, okay. My husband read this entire thread and said that no good could come out of it and only an agenda, yours, for whatever it was is to tee up every other guy here is what this entire thread is about.


Yes ...

I have no clue what you're talking about.

Wasn't looking for an argument. I ABSOLUTELY believe in the captain and first mate model. I admire that Gabrielle and Laird didn't fail at year 4. Whether it's because she made a choice, or he made a choice ... I could give a sh!t. They made it work.

Mine didn't work.

Yours doesn't work a hell of a lot more than it does work ... yet you remain with and committed to the man that you love ... which I admire, and am envious of, tremendously.

I made ALL of the decisions in my marriage. All of them. Not because that is what I wanted or demanded. Because she forfeited any sense of responsibility or contribution for fear of getting it wrong. Instead of stepping up, she went fetal ... and then resented me for the calls I made as I tried to hold our marital sh!t together. She didn't want to make decisions, but was angry that someone else did. And despite all of it, I kept inviting her to be my partner ... and she kept turning me down.
I really couldn't win. To this day, if she doesn't like how a conversation is going, she calls me controlling. 

Yes, I believe that partners need to submit to one another. Do I want a surrendered wife? No.

Do I want a woman that can strike fear and respect in the hearts of her subordinates in the office, and then come home to me and melt in my arms? Yes I do. Think I've found her ...

The idea of someone trusting me to make good decisions and in turn supporting me ... and those decisions, or gently and lovingly pointing out where I err'd? That would be something for me.

I want what works. 

I want to be with someone who also wants what works.

I saw the brief interview I linked. I am generally bothered when someone talks about what works for them, serves their needs and creates contentment, and others rail that it can't be so. And to reiterate ... my anger was that the thing that would make her book popular, were going to be the concepts that many found, unpopular ... per the comments at the linked site, not here. Did you feel mocked?

My intention wasn't to upset you, or anyone else. Thought I had conveyed as much in my last few posts. I was dropping my guard, not trying to be passive aggressive.

Hope the explanation makes things clearer. If not, I blame the two Manhattans.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Deejo said:


> Yes ...
> 
> I have no clue what you're talking about.
> 
> No clue, really? You said crowing and whatever.
> 
> Wasn't looking for an argument. I ABSOLUTELY believe in the captain and first mate model. I admire that Gabrielle and Laird didn't fail at year 4. Whether it's because she made a choice, or he made a choice ... I could give a sh!t. They made it work.
> 
> I agree.
> 
> Mine didn't work.
> 
> Yours doesn't work a hell of a lot more than it does work ... yet you remain with and committed to the man that you love ... which I admire, and am envious of, tremendously.
> 
> Actually it works quite well. We screw on a near nightly basis, something I needed for years. After my diagnosis and my treatment, he fell to his knees literally and said please don't let Bright Eyes ever suffer or for a second not get the best care. He then spent $180k after insurance in 2012 just to keep me alive, never mind my almost $3k a month medication which also isn't covered by Blue Cross/Blue Shield. To date, he comes home and brings me sunflowers, a smile and is beyond loving.
> 
> I made ALL of the decisions in my marriage. All of them. Not because that is what I wanted or demanded. Because she forfeited any sense of responsibility or contribution for fear of getting it wrong. Instead of stepping up, she went fetal ... and then resented me for the calls I made as I tried to hold our marital sh!t together. She didn't want to make decisions, but was angry that someone else did. And despite all of it, I kept inviting her to be my partner ... and she kept turning me down.
> I really couldn't win. To this day, if she doesn't like how a conversation is going, she calls me controlling.
> 
> That's bad. Really bad. Relationships are about compromise. If you don't do it, you have no business being in one.
> 
> Yes, I believe that partners need to submit to one another. Do I want a surrendered wife? No.
> 
> Cool, neither does Jon but as I said in previous posts submissive can often times be mistaken for compromise. I am full of compromise.
> 
> Do I want a woman that can strike fear and respect in the hearts of her subordinates in the office, and then come home to me and melt in my arms? Yes I do. Think I've found her ...
> 
> I think you did.
> 
> The idea of someone trusting me to make good decisions and in turn supporting me ... and those decisions, or gently and lovingly pointing out where I err'd? That would be something for me.
> 
> That to me is what a relationship is all about!
> 
> I want what works.
> 
> I want to be with someone who also wants what works.
> 
> So do I and I have it (now).
> 
> I saw the brief interview I linked. I am generally bothered when someone talks about what works for them, serves their needs and creates contentment, and others rail that it can't be so. And to reiterate ... my anger was that the thing that would make her book popular, were going to be the concepts that many found, unpopular ... per the comments at the linked site, not here. Did you feel mocked?
> 
> My intention wasn't to upset you, or anyone else. Thought I had conveyed as much in my last few posts. I was dropping my guard, not trying to be passive aggressive.
> 
> Hope the explanation makes things clearer. If not, I blame the two Manhattans.


No worries and no harm done. I just wanted to point out the other side, that's all.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Life is a series of compromises. Case in point and kinda long so fair warning: Our eldest son dropped out of college. He got a partial scholarship to a baby Ivy league school and decided to leave, move in with his girlfriend and now works at Home Depot. It crushed my heart in so many ways.
> 
> His room was as it stayed until my husband said we should turn it in to something else. I agreed and said I wanted a craft room as this would be "my" room. Our house has a man cave and everything else in the house is a compromise of furniture/color/decor, etc, so unlike many houses, it isn't solely a womans. Jon said sure, let's do it. He said he wanted a media room for us to watch movies. We butted heads for a bit but both of us understood the other.
> 
> I left to go to San Diego to see a dear friend and while I was gone I couldn't help but wonder how this room would all turn out. I was gone for 8 days.
> 
> When I got back, he ushered me in to the room telling me to close my eyes. When I opened them, it was a wonder of awesomeness. This room had 3 black walls for glare and 1 white, a gorgeous sofa and club chairs. An amazing curtain over the window and about $10k in electronic equipment. He had purchased a $6k rear projector, our speakers were mounted next to the sofa and piped in through the room and our screen was the white 380 inch wall. When he turned the sound on, my vagina vibrated. It is loud and too cool! He then showed me my craft room. It was the closet of the previous bedroom only he knocked down the wall between the other closet we never used and made the two one. It was 14 x 14 now and decorated it with every single thing I could ever want. New sewing machine, new table, new everything. He must have spent a fortune and given I do the finances, I know he did. It is BEAUTIFUL and I just love every single thing about it.
> 
> My husband called over our eldest to see what we did with his room. He came over marveled at it and said how incredible it was. Three days later he said he wanted to go back to college because he knows that none of this will be possible on a Home Depot wage.
> 
> A man with a plan.


See , this ^^^^right there guys is what you call " game " in marriage. Designed to make a lasting impression.

Stimulating the senses,
Visual , physical ,emotional ,and helps build the ladies confidence in you.
All it takes is a little planning and the ability to function or think out of your comfort zone.


Ok, no more thread jack from me.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Deejo...when people are fresh out of a divorce, they typically are very emotionally charged and ready to fight for or against whatever they thought their marriage problems were about. They are quite adamant that they have learned "the way", after they figure out what went wrong in their own marriage.

Unfortunately, during this time, they also become a bit rigid in their thinking that whatever mistakes they made and their partner made, are ALWAYS mistakes for other people. They find books and data that back them up on this, and they become the expert in "what not to do next time".

This is all very normal and, to me, appears to be what you are doing.

Ah...but then life comes along and teaches them that they STILL don't know everything, and they STILL will make mistakes, and also life teaches them that the mistakes they made in the past don't necessarily define them.....eventually.

You seem to be getting there. You will know you are there when you don't still make examples using your ex-wife as if she was "every woman".


----------



## Deejo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> No worries and no harm done. I just wanted to point out the other side, that's all.


Very, very, happy that you have come through on the other side of cancer. And even more so, that Jon rediscovered his smart, devoted, hot, wife.
You, and many of the other women here actually do represent what I'm referring to. I wasn't looking to lump any one, or all women into a category.

I said it on the other thread, and at it's simplest, I mean it. When it comes to fight or flight in maintaining your marriage, I want a fighter. 

Sometimes being a fighter means knowing that a particular fight isn't worth winning at the expense of the relationship.

You know that. And you quite obviously practice it. 

I'm not advocating "Whatever you say, dear ...". I'm advocating that I'd rather have emotional symmetry with my partner rather than being equal, or right, or have control over them.

And to me, part of emotional symmetry is knowing when to submit to the other partner in terms of trusting that they will guide the relationship towards mutually beneficial outcomes and harmony.

It's how I roll.


----------



## Deejo

Faithful Wife said:


> Deejo...when people are fresh out of a divorce, they typically are very emotionally charged and ready to fight for or against whatever they thought their marriage problems were about. They are quite adamant that they have learned "the way", after they figure out what went wrong in their own marriage.
> 
> Unfortunately, during this time, they also become a bit rigid in their thinking that whatever mistakes they made and their partner made, are ALWAYS mistakes for other people. They find books and data that back them up on this, and they become the expert in "what not to do next time".
> 
> This is all very normal and, to me, appears to be what you are doing.
> 
> Ah...but then life comes along and teaches them that they STILL don't know everything, and they STILL will make mistakes, and also life teaches them that the mistakes they made in the past don't necessarily define them.....eventually.
> 
> You seem to be getting there. You will know you are there when you don't still make examples using your ex-wife as if she was "every woman".


I don't yet have a good handle on when you are being sweet versus when you're taking a dig ... which I like by the way, so no worries.

I loved your f*ck post.

So, I'm going off the premise that you're being encouraging.

I try to be very aware of my own sh!t. I was outlining my circumstances as a matter of perspective. Not because I'm still ruminating over them.

I still believe that my ex is a wonderful woman. She has codependency issues and low self-esteem. She developed a full blown sexual aversion to me, to the point that ANY contact was seen as pretext for sex. Yes. It was very, very, bad, and tragic.

The divorce is in truth, relatively recent. However, the marriage and the relationship ended 5 years ago.

I don't for a moment project all of our issues onto other struggling marriages, or women for that matter. But there are tremendous overlapping issues in MOST marriages in decline.

Which is why I believe that once a couple chooses to stop serving the marriage as a collective ... you stop growing. May stay married, but you stop growing as a couple.

My opinion, is that women see 'submissive' as a dirty word. I don't. I don't perceive it as a state of being. I see at as an act ... and usually an act of love and trust.

And I like to think that we can agree that love and trust are things we want to foster in our marriages.


----------



## Faithful Wife

"My opinion, is that women see 'submissive' as a dirty word. I don't. I don't perceive it as a state of being. I see at as an act ... and usually an act of love and trust.

And I like to think that we can agree that love and trust are things we want to foster in our marriages."


I only use submission in sexual terms, so yeah, in a way, it is a "dirty" word.

In marriage? I think it is a totally unnecessary word. I think it is just great for some people...some marriages thrive in submission, one to the other or both to each other, or whatever. In the same way, some people cannot or will not sexually submit and some do. Works for some, not others.

Why do you LIKE the word, as applied to marriage, versus sex? Why do you feel like championing the word? Is it not because you felt like your ex-w would never submit to you on any level? Because that's how it sounds.

Do you not see it as button pushing, really?

Did you have your girlfriend read this article?


----------



## Almostrecovered

Deejo said:


> I loved your f*ck post.


----------



## TiggyBlue

Deejo said:


> My opinion, is that women see 'submissive' as a dirty word. I don't. I don't perceive it as a state of being. I see at as an act ... and usually an act of love and trust.


I think that is probably because the definition of submissive is meekly obedient or passive.


----------



## always_alone

Deejo said:


> My opinion, is that women see 'submissive' as a dirty word. I don't. I don't perceive it as a state of being. I see at as an act ... and usually an act of love and trust.
> 
> And I like to think that we can agree that love and trust are things we want to foster in our marriages.


Yes. A lot of women will have trouble with the word "submissive", as they will with the Captain and First Mate metaphor.

Why? Because these terms carry with them a power struggle. One where the woman is virtually always told that she should be the one to be 'under' or the 'first mate' because she isn't 'wired' to be a leader and he is. And let's be clear: this is not a problem of the distant past that feminism has freed us from. It is absolutely current, and contains messages that many women grew up with about what they are and can and cannot do based entirely on stereotypes about their gender. It is so current, it is on this very thread.

But most women (that I know or pretend to understand, anyway) aren't trying to usurp power, or even engage in a power struggle. They just want to be recognized and valued for what they bring to the table. And not just because it fits some preconceived ideal of what a good woman should look like.

And really, what is so very wrong with words like compromise, collaborate, cooperate, accommodate, support, nourish, embrace ...?


----------



## always_alone

I'd add that I think Gabby is indeed advocating for the 'surrendered wife'. Or at least a close approximation of it.


----------



## Faithful Wife

I know a woman who loves the Surrendered Wife model of marriage. It works for her, very well. I respect her, and her marriage, too.

But in my opinion, she is also the type of woman who is afraid to take charge, take challenges on, make decisions, take a risk of any kind....so in her case, the Surrendered Wife model gives her the safety net she requires in marriage.

Again, it works for her so I'm all for whatever works for people.

But she does also wonder what she is supposed to do when she disagrees with her husband. She wonders how she is supposed to handle it when he is doing something she doesn't like. She feels helpless....and when he is doing things the way she loves it done, it feels great to have no responsibility. But when he steps on her feet, in her model, she can't even say "ouch."

To each their own.


(Deejo...I know you were not advocating the Surrendered Wife....I was just making the comment because I do feel it is a great model for SOME women, as with my friend).


----------



## SimplyAmorous

I just now watched this Video....and of course I agree with every word Gabriella said..... Not long ago I sat under a similar teaching from a woman Speaker at one of our Mops meetings.... the subject >> Being "Submission" to our husbands... 

The manner she presented it >> I agreed with her every word...(and of course this doesn't mean when the man is abusive in any way shape or form).. She wrote a book about her struggle just as Gabriella did - even if her name would not be in lights...this too transformed her marriage...

Weatherproof Your Home . . . Against the Storms of Life: .... Her story in a nut shell & some of it's lessons taken from a post I did on Feminism not long ago....



> She laid her faults & failings bear...how her way of living was hindering her own marriage....for 20 yrs they were in a power struggle/ turmoil... came close to divorcing a couple times, separated a few times, she earned more than her husband, she bulked, they argued , fights never ending...then in her 40's, their son on drugs.....his example of leadership from his parents was not there... no respect....she wanted to blame him.... but the fingers were pointing back at HER.. she changed...A lot of talk about respecting our husbands ..... her marriage revived... what she learned through that - led to many speakings/ her book....helping many marriages.
> 
> She said A woman is meant to yield to her husbands Lead... and He, in turn is to provide for her NEED... How does one argue with this? IF he is a GOOD man leading the family in an honorable way...being the Provider & Protector he was meant to be, this being the heart of his concern as a MAN.
> 
> A couple needs to be on the same page..this = a workable marriage...We can't "be" submissive to our husbands unless it is a *choice we make*. We can't make that choice unless we have the freedom to NOT be submissive.
> 
> She explained if there is ANY negative DOMINANCE (as a dictatorship, demanding, forceful, overbearing)...it then is not considered "Submission" at all...it is being abused.
> 
> *The Positive role of Dominance is Leadership.* This means leading from the front, striving to make good decisions, taking responsibility for the outcomes, and having respect for those who choose to follow.
> 
> *The negative pole of Dominance is Dictatorship:* “Just do it because I say so.” This means forcing outcomes by giving others no choice, blaming others when the results are not as expected, treating subordinates with contempt.




Taken from Gabreielle's article...



> Volleyball star Gabrielle Reece and pro surfer Laird Hamilton have been married for 17 years, and Reece recently revealed the controversial secret to their successful relationship:*creating an "old fashioned" dynamic.*
> 
> In appearances on the "Today" show and "Rock Center With Brian Williams" Friday, Reece explained that she and Hamilton considered divorcing after four years of marriage. *But their relationship improved when they learned how to complement each other by adopting more traditional gender roles.*
> 
> *“I think the idea of living with a partner is ‘How can I make their life better?*'" Reece told "Today's" Natalie Morales. “So if I’m the woman and he’s the man, then yes, that’s the dynamic.* I’m willing and I choose to serve my family and my husband because it creates a dynamic where he is then in fact acting more like a man and masculine and treating me the way I want to be treated."*


 This has always been what worked for us. 



> Reece recently wrote a memoir called "My Foot Is Too Big For The Glass Slipper," in which she claims, “to truly be feminine means being soft, receptive, and –- look out, here it comes –- submissive.”


My husband would be the 1st to say, I am not exactly the most soft spoken type woman around..... if I don't like something ...he's gonna hear *why*.....it does help we THINK alike on most things ..... but I've learned over the years, if I show him disrespect (I've had my [email protected]#)... or undermine his authority.... it only makes ME look bad, then I feel bad - cause he is a very good man.....and sometimes it literally BITES me in the a$$ .....then I am left "eating crow" ....while he gets to tell me ...."I told you so with a ".....yeah....better to listen to the man in the beginning.

Though we do brainstorm together for most things... he values my input...and I so appreciate that. I really haven't had to deal with a MEAN man - or bad moods as Gabriella has.... so even more Kudos to her for keeping her cool, biting her tongue when necessary .....which set the stage for calming him... 



> But on the "Today" show, she clarified that she doesn't think being "submissive" is a sign of weakness.
> 
> “*I think because women have the ability to set the tone, that the ultimate strength and showing real power, I believe, is creating that environment," she said. "I think it’s a sign of strength.*’’


 She mentioned "empowering " our male partner, to have an attitude of "SERVING" our families and our Husband....he then in turn will Cherish us for the wives we are. 

Yeah.....couldn't agree more.


----------



## Tall Average Guy

always_alone said:


> But most women (that I know or pretend to understand, anyway) aren't trying to usurp power, or even engage in a power struggle. They just want to be recognized and valued for what they bring to the table. And not just because it fits some preconceived ideal of what a good woman should look like.


Not sure how true that is in the population at large, at least as far as a power struggle. I see it in real life, and here on this forum - women who refuse to let go of any decisions. In their concern to maintain their identity, they seem hell bent on being involved in any and all decisions, as if they don't trust their husband to look out for them. These same women have no issue, however, with taking unilateral action on their own when, in their opinion, it is merited.

It is not clear to me if it is even intentional. Perhaps some subconscious defensive mechanism to ensure they are seen as strong independent women who are not submitting to their husband.

Maybe this is a tiny fraction that just stick in my mind, but my impression is that it is a larger group than many would like to admit.


----------



## COguy

always_alone said:


> Yes. A lot of women will have trouble with the word "submissive", as they will with the Captain and First Mate metaphor.
> 
> Why? Because these terms carry with them a power struggle. One where the woman is virtually always told that she should be the one to be 'under' or the 'first mate' because she isn't 'wired' to be a leader and he is. And let's be clear: this is not a problem of the distant past that feminism has freed us from. It is absolutely current, and contains messages that many women grew up with about what they are and can and cannot do based entirely on stereotypes about their gender. It is so current, it is on this very thread.
> 
> But most women (that I know or pretend to understand, anyway) aren't trying to usurp power, or even engage in a power struggle. They just want to be recognized and valued for what they bring to the table. And not just because it fits some preconceived ideal of what a good woman should look like.


Your last paragraph shows you still associate submission with a power struggle. It's not submission if you're fighting with the person you're submitting to. Have you ever seen a boat race and watched the first mate fight the captain?

Submission is the opposite of a struggle, it's trust in leadership.



> And really, what is so very wrong with words like compromise, collaborate, cooperate, accommodate, support, nourish, embrace ...?


Nothing is wrong with those words. And again, that you offer them up as an alternative to "submission" shows that you still hold a strongly feminist view of the idea. As if the dichotomy is: submission to a tyrannical dictator, or working together.

None of the words you used is antagonistic to the idea of accepting traditional gender roles in a relationship.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

I don't see why submission or whatever you choose to call it is a bad thing if it makes the individual happy and fulfilled.Isn't that really all that matters?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Totally agree Scarlet...but I don't see why some people think ALL OTHER marriages should follow one model? I mean, I think that's what Deejo is saying? Perhaps I am wrong.

The capt./first mate, or husband leads - wife follows, or man on top - woman in submission....these are all perfectly good models for marriage.

But not EVERY marriage.

Why would there ever be a one size fits all model?

It just can't work.


----------



## Almostrecovered

when I sold cars we had a saying "There's an ass for every seat"


----------



## ScarletBegonias

Faithful Wife said:


> Totally agree Scarlet...but I don't see why some people think ALL OTHER marriages should follow one model? I mean, I think that's what Deejo is saying? Perhaps I am wrong.
> 
> The capt./first mate, or husband leads - wife follows, or man on top - woman in submission....these are all perfectly good models for marriage.
> 
> But not EVERY marriage.
> 
> Why would there ever be a one size fits all model?
> 
> It just can't work.


oh definitely.I think people need to say screw conforming and do what works best for their lives and their love.
If you're happy and love while feeling safe emotionally and physically...what more is there to a life lived well?


----------



## nice777guy

Almostrecovered said:


> when I sold cars we had a saying "There's an ass for every seat"


Are women the seats or the asses?!?


----------



## Deejo

Faithful Wife said:


> Why do you LIKE the word, as applied to marriage, versus sex? Why do you feel like championing the word? Is it not because you felt like your ex-w would never submit to you on any level? Because that's how it sounds.
> 
> Do you not see it as button pushing, really?
> 
> Did you have your girlfriend read this article?


I don't care about the word.
I care about the 'act' and seeing as a few folks do struggle with the words, I mean the action or behavior demonstrated; not the act of submission itself.
My partner is in no way sexually submissive ... but she is submissive to me. Which translates into love, trust, and mutual satisfaction. And in the sexual sense, I don't think most people have a problem with this ... or maybe they do.

In the partnership? I have no issue with any of the other words that always_alone outlined. Again, I care about what it looks like in action.

Going to point out something else that peeves me. Nowhere ... in any of my posts did I say 'All women', 'or this is what everybody should do'. But people ... in this thread ... _think_ that is what I said.

It isn't.

I linked a video in which a strong, independent, successful, woman decided to choose her family over 'having it all', and I admire her choice.

THAT is the woman I want. The woman who is willing to make the choice to serve the relationship, because she values it, and me, without wondering what the 'have it all' crowd has to say about it, or feel like she is being robbed of her autonomy or self-direction. And to be clear ... in my mind 'serving the relationship' doesn't mean she needs to give up who she is and what's important to her. 

And no, I don't see it as button pushing.

I see it as a model for a working relationship, as others participating here, and including your friend have attested to.

Equal? I think that notion is utter crap. No relationship is equal. Nor should it be. Equitable, I can easily accept. Equal is smoke and mirrors ... unless you are caught up in the power piece. And in my mind if you are worried about who the wielder of power is, you've got bigger issues than serving the marriage.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

nice777guy said:


> Are women the seats or the asses?!?


depends on her attitude


----------



## Faithful Wife

"Nowhere ... in any of my posts did I say 'All women', 'or this is what everybody should do'. But people ... in this thread ... think that is what I said.

It isn't."

Fair enough.


----------



## Faithful Wife

FWIW, my husband and I both submit to Love. Our Love for each other dictates how we behave. When we ignore our Love, we get into trouble, we fight, we become entrenched in our positions, we don't remember how to compromise.

But when we follow our Love, we know exactly how to behave within marriage, and things flow beautifully.

If anyone asked my H if I am a submissive wife or if he wanted one, he would laugh, and then would tell them that we both submit to Love.


----------



## Deejo

Faithful Wife said:


> FWIW, my husband and I both submit to Love. Our Love for each other dictates how we behave. When we ignore our Love, we get into trouble, we fight, we become entrenched in our positions, we don't remember how to compromise.
> 
> But when we follow our Love, we know exactly how to behave within marriage, and things flow beautifully.
> 
> If anyone asked my H if I am a submissive wife or if he wanted one, he would laugh, and then would tell them that we both submit to Love.


See?

We agree. Wasn't that easy?


----------



## Faithful Wife

:scratchhead:

Well...I guess.

Except that in my world, the word submission is only used in a sexual sense.

And that my husband would NEVER say something so (IMO) rediculous as "women don't know what they want".

And that we use the Policy of Joint Agreement, which means that all decisions are made jointly, not by one of us or the other independantly.

And that neither of us has been burned in the way you have been so we aren't hair-triggery about these types of issues. (We have plenty of our own, however).

So yeah, if you say so.

Don't get me wrong...I can see you are a loving, great man and fully capable of a great relationship, and I'm sure your chicka really digs you.

But I honestly don't think we are saying the same thing. I think you haven't yet experienced a great, long term relationship in which you get to work out all these issues happily...when you get there, we'll probably be saying the same thing.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Deejo said:


> Equal? I think that notion is utter crap. No relationship is equal. Nor should it be. Equitable, I can easily accept. Equal is smoke and mirrors ... unless you are caught up in the power piece. And in my mind if you are worried about who the wielder of power is, you've got bigger issues than serving the marriage.


:iagree:

That's why I keep saying on this thread that when that
" equality" argument rears its head, technically the marriage is over.
Reciprocity is a more acceptable , functional word for relationships.
Equality is like a moving target and is a subjective terminology.

The topic itself is a tricky one.


----------



## always_alone

COguy said:


> Your last paragraph shows you still associate submission with a power struggle.


Well, yes. And in my second paragraph, I said it point blank:. The concept of submission carries with it the notion of a power imbalance. I get hat a first mate must obey his captain. I'm just not convinced that a power imbalance is good for a marriage. 




COguy said:


> None of the words you used is antagonistic to the idea of accepting traditional gender roles in a relationship.


You are right about this. None of those words is counter to traditional gender roles. But I still am, at least for me. Just not very traditional.


----------



## Caribbean Man

always_alone said:


> The concept of submission carries with it the notion of a power imbalance. I get hat a first mate must obey his captain. I'm just not convinced that a power imbalance is good for a marriage.


Is this power imbalance you speak of the same as a power differential in a relationship?

If so, is a power differential in a relationship a bad thing in itself?

And if the imbalance of power resides in lets say a wife, what right does the husband have to demand that she give up some of _her_ power?


----------



## tacoma

I've never been in a relationship that didn't have some type of "power imbalance" to some degree.

It's in the nature of relationships


----------



## Caribbean Man

tacoma said:


> I've never been in a relationship that didn't have some type of "power imbalance" to some degree.
> 
> It's in the nature of relationships


Well that's what I'm thinking myself.
So the issue cannot really be the imbalance of power in a relationship, but the use / misuse of that differential..
Yes?


----------



## always_alone

Tall Average Guy said:


> Not sure how true that is in the population at large, at least as far as a power struggle. I see it in real life, and here on this forum - women who refuse to let go of any decisions. In their concern to maintain their identity, they seem hell bent on being involved in any and all decisions, as if they don't trust their husband to look out for them. These same women have no issue, however, with taking unilateral action on their own when, in their opinion, it is merited.


I'm curious about where you are getting this because i don't see it at all. If we want to list crazy things women do to mess up their relationships, i'd put no (or little) sex at the top of the list, followed closely by being a shrill control freak who yells at her husband for stupid things like folding the towels incorrectly.

Not sure that either of these issues can be solved by adopting more traditional gender roles in marriage. Not even sure that the more root cause of lack of communication/connection can be solved this way.


----------



## always_alone

Caribbean Man said:


> Well that's what I'm thinking myself.
> So the issue cannot really be the imbalance of power in a relationship, but the use / misuse of that differential..
> Yes?


I'm not quite sure where you are coming from, CM, because it seems like in one post you are talking about the man leading, in another it's mutual submission, then equality, then we're back to necessary power differentials. So, I'm not sure my response will at all address your point. But here goes

The assumption with submission is that there is a higher authority. The assumption with the Captain/first mate metaphor is that the relationship is hierarchical, with a head of the household who holds the ultimate responsibility. 

My question is why do we need to assume this power differential in order to have a healthy, working relationship? Why can't it be a collaborative team effort?

I'd ask these same questions whether the appointed head was either the man or the woman.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

tacoma said:


> I've never been in a relationship that didn't have some type of "power imbalance" to some degree.
> 
> It's in the nature of relationships


I never really thought of it this way,but it's true.We all have our strengths and weaknesses.

If SO has a strength in maintaining the outside of the home,like landscaping as an example, wouldn't it be better for the beauty of our home to let him call the shots on what he does out there? If he knows more about it and is going to be caring for it,why shouldn't he be "captain" of that piece of our lives?
If I have strength in determining the healthiest,cheapest dinner menu for the week and SO can't cook more than toast...wouldn't it makes sense for me to be the "captain" of that aspect?

Regarding more important things like finances,if he's better with numbers and budgeting,shouldn't I trust him to guide us in all financial matters and be the "captain" in that area? Or if I'm the better money manager,shouldn't he trust me? 

Would that be a power imbalance or would that be smart distribution of strengths? Is mutual submission not really submission at all?Instead couldn't people think of it as an intelligent utilization of a person's strong points and interests?

Or am I rambling and not making sense?


----------



## Deejo

always_alone said:


> My question is why do we need to assume this power differential in order to have a healthy, working relationship? Why can't it be a collaborative team effort?
> 
> I'd ask these same questions whether the appointed head was either the man or the woman.


I'm trying to understand why you presume that such a model isn't collaborative. 

Like Scarlet Begonias pointed out just above, goal being that you don't need to collaborate on everything.

I don't care what color hand towels you want in the bathroom, so why would you care what kind of weed killer I use on the lawn?


----------



## tacoma

ScarletBegonias said:


> Or am I rambling and not making sense?


You're making perfect sense SB and I believe your post outlines how a relationship should work logistically.


----------



## tacoma

I have a submissive wife BUT I didn't marry a submissive woman.

It seemed to me the moment we wed she intentionally put all the cards (Money, sex, emotional) in my hands concerning who controls our overall relationship.

I have spent years handing back to her as many of these cards as I could (Education, employment, financial, emotional, sex) and actually helping to build her up in order to have more power.

She doesn't really seem to want them too much.

While at times I feel like I want a little more of a power struggle from her concerning many aspects of our life I've learned to live with it.

For the most part it's working for us.


----------



## Tall Average Guy

always_alone said:


> I'm curious about where you are getting this because i don't see it at all. If we want to list crazy things women do to mess up their relationships, i'd put no (or little) sex at the top of the list, followed closely by being a shrill control freak who yells at her husband for stupid things like folding the towels incorrectly.


Can these actions not be about control and maintaining their independence? 

I see a number of posts from women demanding equal say in all decisions. They require active agreement on these decisions, then use their own disagreement to get their way. Of course, when an issue is important to them, they are willing to move forward on their own even if they don't get the active agreement they demand from their spouse. The problem is that they are not shrill control freaks. Rather, they hide behind the veneer of negotiations to maintain the control they need. Some of it, I think, is akin to the benevolent dictator, where they view their actions as being for the good of the relationship, while not giving the same assumption to their spouse. It is likely not even intentional, but I do think it occurs.



> Not sure that either of these issues can be solved by adopting more traditional gender roles in marriage. Not even sure that the more root cause of lack of communication/connection can be solved this way.


I agree that more traditional gender roles may not solve the above issues, including communication. 

My point is merely that there is quite often a power struggle under the guise of equality. I don't think it is likely that humans will stop at the 50/50 line on their own accord, even if unintentionally.


----------



## Caribbean Man

always_alone said:


> My question is why do we need to assume this power differential in order to have a healthy, working relationship? Why can't it be a collaborative team effort?


Because every relationship_ has_ a power differential.
People are not the same and in most cases , opposites attract.
Nobody wants to be married to an _exact_ replica of themselves.
Human beings are multi dimensional beings, therefore power imbalances in relationship will exist.

In the example Brighteyes gave earlier on, her husband has certain strengths and she has certain strengths.
How do you determine " equality" in a situation like that?
Attempting to do so will result in power struggles occurring ,because everyone feels their contribution / skills are important

He husband gave her control of the household financial future, she controls investment decisions, and I'm sure she still cooks, decorate and cleans the house.
She has allowed him to take charge of other aspects of the marriage that he has shown definite leadership skills and abilities that supersedes hers.

The point is, a power differential will ALWAYS exist in any relationship, the challenge in a marriage is to successfully manage it.Each marriage has its own dynamic , hence the " free size " approach to imbalances cannot work. 

I don't think either, that approaching it from a perspective of demanding that there be no imbalances is a sensible approach, given the nature of intimate relationships.

In marriages both people can only win if there's respect for each other's skills , contribution and 100% giving and reciprocity .

When you get bogged down in power struggles of " equality" and so forth,both parties loose.


----------



## tacoma

Trenton said:


> Absolutely a smart distribution of strengths. I think issues arise when one values their own strengths more than their partners or values their own contributions less.


This, this is my trouble with the wife


----------



## tacoma

Trenton said:


> It's a small issue with my husband as well and it translated to passive aggressive behaviors from him that led to a lot of aggressive behaviors from me and arguing and resentment on both sides.


This is an apt description of the last 3 years of my life.

How do you get past that?


----------



## ScarletBegonias

Trenton said:


> Absolutely a smart distribution of strengths. I think issues arise when one values their own strengths more than their partners or values their own contributions less.


This was an issue in my marriage.He valued his strengths more than he valued mine.I also allowed him to get away with that because I valued my own contributions less due to my lack of self worth.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> It's a small issue with my husband as well and it translated to passive aggressive behaviors from him that led to a lot of aggressive behaviors from me and arguing and resentment on both sides.
> 
> I also have control issues if not kept in check (by myself and others) followed up quickly by huge ideas and a desire to put them into action (oh yeah, and impatience!). So I can be overwhelming to anyone not to mention someone who is laid back and passive.


This ^^^exact dynamic is what existed between my wife and I before counselling.
Mine being the same as yours [ except the control issues] and her's being your husband's disposition. She was independent in her own way, didn't grow up with a father, and had a passive aggressive side of her.

That's why I'm big on submission. I had to submit to her many times even if I thought what she said didn't make any sense, because she doesn't ask for much , just to maintain her sense of independence.
No. It is not condescending.
It is about me appreciating her for who she is and allowing her space to grow.
So I no longer sweat the small stuff.
She expects me to handle all the major stuff, and over the years, little by little she came out of her comfort zone.
When she needs my advice, she just asks, I'm always there for her and she knows that.

What I recognized is that she needed to feel appreciated for her contribution, and part of getting her to feel that way was me holding back on some of my dominance.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Tall Average Guy said:


> Not sure how true that is in the population at large, at least as far as a power struggle. I see it in real life, and here on this forum - women who refuse to let go of any decisions. In their concern to maintain their identity, they seem hell bent on being involved in any and all decisions, as if they don't trust their husband to look out for them. These same women have no issue, however, with taking unilateral action on their own when, in their opinion, it is merited.
> 
> It is not clear to me if it is even intentional. Perhaps some subconscious defensive mechanism to ensure they are seen as strong independent women who are not submitting to their husband.
> 
> Maybe this is a tiny fraction that just stick in my mind, but my impression is that it is a larger group than many would like to admit.


I don't see what is wrong with the dynamic you describe? Why,exactly, should a woman NOT be involved in the decisons that concern her? If she is of sound mind and is an adult....? Why are women expected to hand over all this control to men just because they are married? What makes men so worthy of that kind of trust and responsibility? Marriage is a partnership, a UNION of TWO, not a dictatorship ruled by one. 

Hubs and I were discussing this the other day. I mentioned this thread and said how I was arguing that women should never submit to men, for their own safety and well being. I said that marriages are shared by two and not run by one. He asked me who ran ours. I said we both do. Then I told him to drive to Home Depot(we were on the road). So he drove to Future Shop instead. Insubordination in the ranks!!!! 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Tall Average Guy

LadyOfTheLake said:


> I don't see what is wrong with the dynamic you describe? Why,exactly, should a woman NOT be involved in the decisons that concern her? If she is of sound mind and is an adult....? Why are women expected to hand over all this control to men just because they are married? What makes men so worthy of that kind of trust and responsibility? Marriage is a partnership, a UNION of TWO, not a dictatorship ruled by one.


No reason, other than being so set on being independent and maintaining your own autonomy that you ignore all else. Ignoring that your spouse may be better at something, so his or her judgment should be given greater weight. Ignoring what they are telling you because it does not fit into what you want.

To be clear, I think it should be both ways. I certainly defer to my wife in areas where she has expertise. Again, I am merely noting that some women, in their zeal to never give up their independence and demonstrate equality require input into every decision that is made as if they have equal ability. Unfortunately, some of these same women forget to extend that same courtesy to their husband. So sometimes it is about a power struggle.



> Hubs and I were discussing this the other day. I mentioned this thread and said how I was arguing that women should never submit to men, for their own safety and well being. I said that marriages are shared by two and not run by one. He asked me who ran ours. I said we both do. Then I told him to drive to Home Depot(we were on the road). So he drove to Future Shop instead. Insubordination in the ranks!!!!
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


If that is what you need as a person, that is fine. Just recognize it for what it is. You need to maintain that independence for any number of reasons. But it does not come without some cost. If doing so outweighs those costs, then no need to change.


----------



## Deejo

LadyOfTheLake said:


> He asked me who ran ours. I said we both do. Then I told him to drive to Home Depot(we were on the road). So he drove to Future Shop instead. Insubordination in the ranks!!!!
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Right ... you both do ... because you said so.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

Deejo said:


> Right ... you both do ... because you said so.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> Obviously more complicated than this and still a work in progress ,


:iagree:

Yes it is a very complicated dynamic.
That's why I have no objection to my wife doing the things she does, so long as she respects our boundaries.

I know she means well and she has my back covered. I too have her's covered.
She respects me and respect is very high on my list of needs.
That sets the tone for all our interactions. 
Now we end up laughing whenever we clash.
It is a much better place.


----------



## always_alone

Deejo said:


> I'm trying to understand why you presume that such a model isn't collaborative.
> 
> Like Scarlet Begonias pointed out just above, goal being that you don't need to collaborate on everything.
> 
> I don't care what color hand towels you want in the bathroom, so why would you care what kind of weed killer I use on the lawn?


Because there is a hierarchy built into it. Captain Picard doesn't say let's collaborate, he says this is what we're going to do. Ryker doesn't contradict, he says yessir. 

Now if we're switching this around to say Ryker gets to be Captain in certain aspects and Picard takes the role of first mate, then I'm much less likely to object.

This is not to say that every stupid decision has to be a collaboration, but it is important that the main ones are (have kids , where to live, who works, who stays at home, etc.) Otherwise, i think we run the risk of building resentment in the partner who doesn't feel like they are getting a say.

Frankly I don't care what colour the hand towels are -- but I prefer no weed killers, as I don't want to dump toxic chemicals into the environment. My h and i are totally agreed on both of these points.


----------



## tacoma

Trenton said:


> For me it is learning how to communicate in a way where you're listening rather than assuming and talking over which I did do and the more resentment or anger I had, the worse it would get. It's difficult, it's also worth it.


I think you're me.

Thanks Trenton.


----------



## always_alone

Trenton said:


> For me it is learning how to communicate in a way where you're listening rather than assuming and talking over which I did do and the more resentment or anger I had, the worse it would get. It's difficult, it's also worth it.


This. To me it is much more important to work on listening, not making assumptions, being self-aware enough that I understand what I need and why I might be reacting the way i do, and appreciating him for who he is.

Adopting traditional gender roles or simply acceding to his dominance would serve no end but to fill me with resentment and the sense that my contributions hold no value at all.


----------



## TiggyBlue

always_alone said:


> Adopting traditional gender roles or simply acceding to his dominance would serve no end but to fill me with resentment and the sense that my contributions hold no value at all.


:iagree:
It's not my nature at all I would end up losing respect for myself.


----------



## Caribbean Man

coffee4me said:


> As I'm reading this I'm realizing where some of the discord came in my marriage.
> 
> *For me I never look at power in a relationship, I am beginning to see that perhaps my X did. There became a time in our marriage where he was filled with self doubt and valued himself and his contribution less. (depressed) No matter how I tried to help counseling etc. I couldn't change his image of himself. Perhaps he rebuffed my help as he thought I held the power.*
> 
> Perhaps in his way to gain some control in the house, he decided since he felt inadequate to dominate me, he would instead dominate our children. He began this behavior of demanding from our son and when our son would question his behavior, he jumped down his throat. What was a very close relationship where my son could ask him anything, quickly deteriorated. My X also began to spend uncontrollably and erupted when questioned. Perhaps exerting his control in the area of finances.
> 
> My son has is very confident and did not back down when my X exerted behaviors that my son thought wrong. He was not disrespectful but challenged the logic of what his dad was doing. Therefore, I guess my X felt even less in control. He then develop an us against him mindset.
> 
> Now I sit here and wonder if there was a way to fix it before all this happened. I tried but perhaps I didn't go about it the right way. I think I will make myself crazy wondering why I couldn't fix it, that is what brought me to reading TAM.


Yes,
This is what I meant when I posted that it is a complex dynamic.
That's where submission comes in.
People need to feel a sense of control, even if its over their own thoughts and space.
When there are personalities which are on the opposite scale, often times the stronger one must submit or back down , in order for the weaker one to grow.
A lot of times the disagreements are petty and not really life threatening , I have learned to just allow.
Because when people feel trapped, they can act out in different , negative ways.

When my wife and I had this type of problems, it cost me my first business. She was acting out.
lost hundreds of thousands of dollars.
However I'm glad I didn't loose her!

Edit:

It is good that you are getting clarification reading this thread!


----------



## Caribbean Man

tacoma said:


> I think you're me.
> 
> Thanks Trenton.



Ha ha !
I think she's me too.....


----------



## Faithful Wife

I have one too, Trenton. An emotional penis. Its huge, of course.


----------



## Caribbean Man

coffee4me said:


> My X acting out cost us dearly, All of our savings tens of thousands of dollars wasted on things that benefited him not the family. I gave him space, thought that somehow he needed these things to make him feel a man. I did not challenge him because I felt he needed to feel like he could make decisions without my challenging what he was doing. Plus this behavior and dynamic had not existed in our 20+ year relationship, I actually thought it was a phase.
> 
> I lost him but not the him I had built my life with, I hardly recognize the person he is now.


Wow.,
Sorry it had to come down to this.

But I think what saved us in year three, was that I realized the problem was bigger than I could understand and I suggested MC.

Looks like you were blindsided...
I am assuming that in your case, after 20 years together you may have thought his acting out was his mid life crisis?

I think Trenton said it best, the ability to listen objectively helps.
It did in our situation.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> I may have to check my pants for a penis if you men keep saying I'm you!


Ladies,
When you've got one you don't need to " check " for it.
Every now and then he reminds you a * firm reminder *, that he's still there , and not to be ignored...

Just ask Tacoma.:rofl:


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

No one has answered my questions satisfactorily




LadyOfTheLake said:


> IWhy are women expected to hand over all this control to men just because they are married? *What makes men so worthy of that kind of trust and responsibility*?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ScarletBegonias

never had a man expect me to hand over anything.I did things willingly if I trusted him.


----------



## Adex

Gabrielle Reece is a genius. If wives acted more submissive to their husbands, husbands would be happy because they'd be getting most of what they want in their marriages. More sex, less arguments, and a happy marriage.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Lady...I don't really get it, either.

It really just seems like a religious thing.

Or a "tradition" thing.

Yet...I don't see any proof or reason that "men should be the leader of the relationship/marriage".

However, when a woman asks this question, it is immediately assumed that what she is saying is that SHE should be leading.

I'm not saying that, nor have I ever said that.

That's why I love the Marriage Builders principals. It talks about what works best in marriage and makes NO DISTINCTION between the gender roles (other than the obvious ones, where needs are different...but needs being different has nothing to do with one spouse "leading").

They call it inter-dependance. Not independance and not co-dependance.

My husband has a morman married guy friend. He seems to have a happy, husband-lead marriage (I have full respect for this...it works for them). But my husband's friend thinks the way we do our marriage is fascinating and he wonders how it can possibly work. Principals like the Policy of Joint Agreement just seem soooooo far out in space to him and he jokes my husband about it constantly (good naturedly). It clearly baffles him, yet intrigues him. Like he cannot imagine that two spouses could have a happy and successful marriage without one of them designated as the leader.

Strange.


----------



## Deejo

*Re: Re: You go Gabby*



Adex said:


> Gabrielle Reece is a genius. If wives acted more submissive to their husbands, husbands would be happy because they'd be getting most of what they want in their marriages. More sex, less arguments, and a happy marriage.


Dude ... Really?


----------



## Tall Average Guy

always_alone said:


> This. To me it is much more important to work on listening, not making assumptions, being self-aware enough that I understand what I need and why I might be reacting the way i do, and appreciating him for who he is.
> 
> Adopting traditional gender roles or simply acceding to his dominance would serve no end but to fill me with resentment and the sense that my contributions hold no value at all.


I don't see any reason why those two points are mutually exclusive.


----------



## Topical storm

LadyOfTheLake said:


> Well, in 10+ years together, we've yet to come across a problem that calm discussion and compromise can't solve. He doesn't "give in" to my "demands" because he is not a wimp and I don't make demands. Nor does he make "executive decisions" because I am not his subordinate. He's made some bad decisions that I didn't agree with and I've made some that he didn't agree with.....but we both went along with the other out of compromise. I'm trying to think of an example where one of us would have to make a final call decision against the wishes of the other and I can't think of anything.
> 
> Hubs is a strong man, physically. He can bench more than I weigh and is trained in MMA style fighting because that is something he enjoys. But he's even stronger in my eyes in that he can share power in a relationship and doesn't have to have it all to himself. That shows a truly strong and secure man.


Woah, your husband is strong, how much do you weigh, about 250?


----------



## nice777guy

tacoma said:


> I've never been in a relationship that didn't have some type of "power imbalance" to some degree.
> 
> It's in the nature of relationships


But do relationships only work when the power imbalance favors the Male?


----------



## nice777guy

Adex said:


> Gabrielle Reece is a genius. If wives acted more submissive to their husbands, husbands would be happy because they'd be getting most of what they want in their marriages. More sex, less arguments, and a happy marriage.


Its a good thing that all Men were made in God's perfect image!

:smthumbup:


----------



## nice777guy

Trenton said:


> I'm an example of the opposite I think and does it work? I do believe it can.


But throughout this thread, you've continually questioned whether or not you have a penis.

I really think you should have a couple of glasses of wine later and THEN come back to this thread!!!


----------



## Caribbean Man

I keep seeing this important issue being boxed into the gender/ male vs female thing....
It is not a gender thing, it is a personality type vs personality type thing.
Bringing gender politics into the equation , only makes it more complicated and harder to solve


----------



## TCSRedhead

LadyOfTheLake said:


> No one has answered my questions satisfactorily


Not all men are worthy, the right man is worthy. 

If my husband had been a dolt and I felt I could not trust him to do the right thing for me, our marriage and our family, I wouldn't have married him. 

I have a lot of faith and trust in him and he continues to live up to that. It's not something that 'came naturally' to me after being a single mom for a number of years but I can tell you the happiness outweighs any of the control issues.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> I'm an example of the opposite I think and does it work? I do believe it can.


So you do agree that nothing is inherently evil with a power imbalance in a relationship.
Yes?


----------



## Caribbean Man

TCSRedhead said:


> Not all men are worthy, the right man is worthy.
> 
> If my husband had been a dolt and I felt I could not trust him to do the right thing for me, our marriage and our family, I wouldn't have married him.
> 
> I have a lot of faith and trust in him and he continues to live up to that. It's not something that 'came naturally' to me after being a single mom for a number of years but I can tell you the happiness outweighs any of the control issues.


I said it in my very first post on this thread.
"..._A man must first prove himself worthy of leadership_ ...."
Before his wife submits any of her power to him.
If she wants to lead, the same rule applies.
In any event, no one person possess all the skills necessary to lead any organization.
The notion of leadership in most marriages, is mostly figurative, or somewhat like a default setting.


----------



## Faithful Wife

CM...what do you think about what I am proposing? That there really doesn't have to be a designated "leader"?


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> CM...what do you think about what I am proposing? That there really doesn't have to be a designated "leader"?


That too, is figurative my dear, and in our marriage, sometimes my wife takes complete control of everything. She demands that I " stay out of her way " because she wants to do this project or whatever by herself.

I see it not as she challenging me , but she's challenging herself, which is a huge improvement from the way she was before.

To answer your question, yes your model can work, and maybe it does with other couples.
In fact,any model can work, it depends on the personality types involved.

However, in our marriage, my wife hates to take risks because when things go wrong, it affects her self esteem negatively. She takes it personally and in a bad way.
I take all the risks ,I am the man who makes her dreams and wishes come through.
I am the clean up guy when she messes up.
When she makes a mistake in our business, I am the man that face our clients and take the blows.
I am the man in the background making sure that everything runs ok.
My wife functions best in a stress free environment , I love seeing her carefree. I perform best, under stress.
She has no problem with me being in the leadership position , as long as she benefits.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

TCSRedhead said:


> Not all men are worthy, the right man is worthy.
> 
> If my husband had been a dolt and I felt I could not trust him to do the right thing for me, our marriage and our family, I wouldn't have married him.
> 
> I have a lot of faith and trust in him and he continues to live up to that. It's not something that 'came naturally' to me after being a single mom for a number of years but I can tell you the happiness outweighs any of the control issues.


Why do you not want to have responsibility for yourself or your family? Why do you want your husband to take care of you? Why does that make you happy?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Hmmm....CM. well, ok. That doesn't really seem like an answer, but rather, just a report on your own marriage as one example. No worries, I love hearing about your marriage because you two obviously know how to do it well. But, it didn't really answer my question.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> Hmmm....CM. well, ok. That doesn't really seem like an answer, but rather, just a report on your own marriage as one example. No worries, I love hearing about your marriage because you two obviously know how to do it well. But, it didn't really answer my question.


This is what I said in my last post

Third paragraph:

"..._.To answer your question, yes your model can work, and maybe it does with other couples.
*In fact,any model can work, it depends on the personality types involved*_...."

This^^^ is why I went into detail about my wife and I.
We are two completely different personality types.


----------



## nice777guy

Faithful Wife said:


> CM...what do you think about what I am proposing? That there really doesn't have to be a designated "leader"?


I'm also thinking that a relationship is a series / compilation of a lot of different moving parts.

Emotional, financial, sexual, etc.

No one person would lead in every aspect.


----------



## Caribbean Man

nice777guy said:


> I'm also thinking that a relationship is a series / compilation of a lot of different moving parts.
> 
> Emotional, financial, sexual, etc.
> 
> No one person would lead in every aspect.


Post #292 , today.

"..._In any event, no one person possess all the skills necessary to lead any organization.
*The notion of leadership in most marriages, is mostly figurative, or somewhat like a default setting*_...."


----------



## nice777guy

Caribbean Man said:


> "..._In any event, no one person possess all the skills necessary to lead any organization.
> *The notion of leadership in most marriages, is mostly figurative, or somewhat like a default setting*_...."


I feel like you're trying to go both ways on this issue.

Leadership is merely a notion - but someone has to lead the dance???


----------



## Faithful Wife

CM: "....To answer your question, yes your model can work, and maybe it does with other couples.
In fact,any model can work, it depends on the personality types involved...."

Ok then well....why are you advocating the Gabby thing? Or maybe you aren't. I'm not even sure anymore.


----------



## TCSRedhead

LadyOfTheLake said:


> Why do you not want to have responsibility for yourself or your family? Why do you want your husband to take care of you? Why does that make you happy?


Here is how I feel:

I love being married to someone whom I trust enough to do so. It makes me feel loved, cherished, treasured. My husband literally places my needs and wants above his own. I feel happy being so loved that he values me to that level. 

I don't feel that I don't feel that control is equal to responsibility. I still have responsibility to be a loving wife, to be supportive of my husband, to be a good mother to our children. 

The question may be posed to you: Why do you feel that you need to be in control to be a partner in your marriage? Do you feel that you can't trust your husband to take care of you? Do you think he would view you as 'lesser' if you were not the dominant person in your relationship? 

You've stated in other threads that part of why you're learning to use power tools and repair things is that your husband doesn't do these things for you when you've asked repeatedly so I'm guessing that areas where you've tried to relinquish control, you've been let down or disappointed.


----------



## Faithful Wife

But Red...again...why is it when a woman asks "does one spouse need to be in control at all?" it is assumed that what she is really saying is "I - the woman - should be in control". But I don't think Lady is saying that.

So when you ask her "Why do you feel that you need to be in control to be a partner in your marriage?"....where are you getting that? I don't remember her ever saying SHE needs to be in control? Did she? (Admittedly, she might have and I have missed it, but I don't think she did).


----------



## Faithful Wife

(ps Red....your marriage sounds awesome and you are clearly in love with your H....hats off).


----------



## Tall Average Guy

Faithful Wife said:


> But Red...again...why is it when a woman asks "does one spouse need to be in control at all?" it is assumed that what she is really saying is "I - the woman - should be in control". But I don't think Lady is saying that.
> 
> So when you ask her "Why do you feel that you need to be in control to be a partner in your marriage?"....where are you getting that? I don't remember her ever saying SHE needs to be in control? Did she? (Admittedly, she might have and I have missed it, but I don't think she did).


To butt in here a bit, I don't know if she has explicitly said it, but Lady's comments taken together (women are better leaders, men use women, she needs to be independent and take care of herself) in this and other threads most certainly suggest a belief that she must be in control.


----------



## Faithful Wife

TAG - - I think she just means in control of herself. I don't think she means she must control her husband.

I have read the posts you are thinking of and I just don't see her saying "I - the woman - should be in control of the marriage".

You might be right, and I'm sure Lady will fill us in.


----------



## Deejo

Faithful Wife said:


> CM: "....To answer your question, yes your model can work, and maybe it does with other couples.
> In fact,any model can work, it depends on the personality types involved...."
> 
> Ok then well....why are you advocating the Gabby thing? Or maybe you aren't. I'm not even sure anymore.


I can tell you unequivocally, if my partner placed that level of faith, trust, and love in me ... I would work very hard to continue earning it. And if I failed ... consistently, well that's grounds for a mutiny.

The very simple synergy as I see it, is that if you love and trust me, I am going to be compelled to continue behaving in a manner by which I earn your love and trust.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Ok but Deejo....there is still nothing in what you just said that shows that "the Gabby way" is better than any other way.

My H and I both work our butts off to keep each other's love and trust, too.


----------



## Tall Average Guy

Faithful Wife said:


> TAG - - I think she just means in control of herself. I don't think she means she must control her husband.
> 
> I have read the posts you are thinking of and I just don't see her saying "I - the woman - should be in control of the marriage".
> 
> You might be right, and I'm sure Lady will fill us in.


Fair enough. Not how I read it, but I can see where you could come to a different conclusion.

I would also say that merely saying you don't want to be in control of the marriage may not mean that in view of other statements and actual actions.


----------



## TCSRedhead

Faithful Wife said:


> But Red...again...why is it when a woman asks "does one spouse need to be in control at all?" it is assumed that what she is really saying is "I - the woman - should be in control". But I don't think Lady is saying that.
> 
> So when you ask her "Why do you feel that you need to be in control to be a partner in your marriage?"....where are you getting that? I don't remember her ever saying SHE needs to be in control? Did she? (Admittedly, she might have and I have missed it, but I don't think she did).


Even in the business world, there can only be one driver/boss/captain, whatever you choose to call it. My husband is the pilot, I am a co-pilot. I am not lesser by choosing to be submissive to my husband. Quite the opposite in some ways. 

When you have two people trying to be the driver or be in control, it causes conflict. 

For some reason, a lot of women on TAM seem to be uncomfortable with the idea of a woman willingly relinquishing that driver role to a man. I do find that amusing. 

When Lady referenced the Cake song - I literally snorted with laughter. That pretty much sums up me and my personality at work.


----------



## TCSRedhead

Oh, and I was inferring that from her posted conversation with her husband. 

Where she 'told' him to go do somewhere (implying an order or control). He chose to go someplace different. 

Me - I would have asked if he'd mind going. (submissive approach). He would have gladly agreed knowing it would make me happy.


----------



## Faithful Wife

I totally agree you are not lesser by choosing to be submissive to your H. I also totally agree that your model for marriage can work, very well.

But I disagree with the driving analogy. 

I see marriage more like a business with two equal partners. Both partners will profit or suffer as a result of the partners' decisions. I have worked for several partnerships in business, some who had more than 2 partners, and they ran wonderfully without one partner being the "leader".

All I am saying is that "the Gabby way" is a great way, but there is no proof that it is a "better" way than some other models.

I am not uncomfortable with the idea of willingly relinquishing control, by the way. And neither is my husband. Yet, neither of us feel we have or need "control" of the marriage.

I am also not saying we don't have individual strengths and areas we "lead" better than other areas in our marriage.

I'm just saying that a true partnership - with the right two spouses - can be a good model for marriage, too.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

TCSRedhead said:


> The question may be posed to you: Why do you feel that you need to be in control to be a partner in your marriage? Do you feel that you can't trust your husband to take care of you? Do you think he would view you as 'lesser' if you were not the dominant person in your relationship?
> 
> You've stated in other threads that part of why you're learning to use power tools and repair things is that your husband doesn't do these things for you when you've asked repeatedly so I'm guessing that areas where you've tried to relinquish control, you've been let down or disappointed.


I don't want to be taken care of. I'm not that passive. When you say you want to feel treasured and cherished.....well, I don't. That is too passive and complacent for me. I'm not a decoration or a treasure to be cherished. I am responsible for my own happiness....Dh is responsible for his. I am not the dominant person in the relationship. I make my own decisions and choices but do so with the best interest of the family unit in mind. So does DH. When we are both making decisions with the best interest of everyone in mind, things just work out. Now, I've made some bad mistakes that had I listened to him, wouldn't have happened. But I cleaned up my own mess. Same thing has happened with him. If he had listened to me, things would have turned out better. But I'm not his mother, he's not my father. We share a life but we are still both adults entitled to our own choices. I would never cede that to him and I would never TAKE that from him. In fact there has been times when he's asked for my input and I refuse to give it if I feel it's too personal an issue. If it's something I think he should deal with on his own...I'm not going to take responsibility for him just as I won't allow him to take it for me. 

Just because I won't allow a man to control me, doesn't mean I think the woman should be in control. No adult needs to be in submission to another. It's not fair and it's not right, especially when that submission is expected based on nothing more than gender. Women are supposed to be tender and soft and feminine and submissive and men are supposed to be strong and fearless and decisive? What rot. I haven't been soft a day in my life and don't plan on it anytime soon.....


----------



## Wiserforit

Tall Average Guy said:


> To butt in here a bit, I don't know if she has explicitly said it, but Lady's comments taken together (women are better leaders, men use women, she needs to be independent and take care of herself) in this and other threads most certainly suggest a belief that she must be in control.


Actually that is a pretty useful observation because it doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with men vs women. 

You don't hear men incessantly asserting how independent and confident they are and how every electron orbiting the nucleus of every atom in their partner is only with their permission. 

Control freaks don't think that's what they are. There is always some global theory they are operating under that rationalizes the need to be in control and blow even the most petty thing way out of proportion. So the idea that you are a gender war soldier righting every historic wrong where men dominated women fits into that description.


----------



## Faithful Wife

"You don't hear men incessantly asserting how independent and confident they are and how every electron orbiting the nucleus of every atom in their partner is only with their permission."

I believe there was a 2,000 post Game thread where many men said exactly this.


----------



## Tall Average Guy

TCSRedhead said:


> When Lady referenced the Cake song - I literally snorted with laughter. That pretty much sums up me and my personality at work.


On a tangent, my four year old daughter loves this song (as do I). While she calls it the "I want a girl" song, she does love singing the "short skirt and a loooooooong jacket" part.


----------



## just got it 55

LadyOfTheLake said:


> I was glad to see in the Huff post comments that women aren't buying this tripe. Of course men like it....they get what they want and all the ego stroking and having the little woman under their thumb.
> 
> It's not "man hating" to refuse to submit. I'd refuse to submit to a woman as well. I'm no one's inferior and my husband and I are equal in all things. Maybe I married a gem...he doesn't *expect* me to submit to him....then I wouldn't be ME. We are in this marriage, this family, together. We are partners. I would never respect a man who thought he had to run things simply because he had a penis. How stupid is that?:scratchhead:


This man does not like it. I raised 2 daughters to never submit to anyone’s whatever. They are amazing young women I hope this contributed to their character


----------



## Tall Average Guy

LadyOfTheLake said:


> I make my own decisions and choices but do so with the best interest of the family unit in mind.


I wonder if he agrees.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Tall Average Guy said:


> I wonder if he agrees.


I guess it doesn't really matter in the end. I won't do anything that I feel is detrimental to the family and since we share similar values, it is more than likely we'd agree. And I've only screwed up big time once. 


But he has that leeway as well.


----------



## TCSRedhead

Faithful Wife said:


> I totally agree you are not lesser by choosing to be submissive to your H. I also totally agree that your model for marriage can work, very well.
> 
> But I disagree with the driving analogy.
> 
> I see marriage more like a business with two equal partners. Both partners will profit or suffer as a result of the partners' decisions. I have worked for several partnerships in business, some who had more than 2 partners, and they ran wonderfully without one partner being the "leader".
> 
> All I am saying is that "the Gabby way" is a great way, but there is no proof that it is a "better" way than some other models.
> 
> I am not uncomfortable with the idea of willingly relinquishing control, by the way. And neither is my husband. Yet, neither of us feel we have or need "control" of the marriage.
> 
> I am also not saying we don't have individual strengths and areas we "lead" better than other areas in our marriage.
> 
> I'm just saying that a true partnership - with the right two spouses - can be a good model for marriage, too.


I've honestly never seen the 'true partnership' model work in business nor in marriage. If you have a group of employees with 2 bosses - it causes conflict. Which boss' items take higher priority? How do you choose who to follow? 

What happens in a marriage with two drivers? What happens when you disagree about a big decision? In my marriage, that isn't an issue.

Before you think that my husband is some knuckle-dragging cave dweller, I can tell you that we moved to the city we're in in support of my career. Had he said that was a bad choice, we would have remained where we were. We're facing another move this summer, again in support of my career.

So I'm hardly suffering personally or professionally in being a submissive wife and relinquishing control to my husband in making choices. 

I'm not saying it works for everyone. Some people are not comfortable in roles of dominance or in roles of submission. I am saying that it really does bother me that some of the women on TAM get pretty crotchety about marriage models that don't fit theirs or try to paint it as sexism, etc. 

I'm still unclear on how being treasured or cherished is passive as well so maybe it's just a lack of understanding all the way around.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Red said: "I've honestly never seen the 'true partnership' model work in business nor in marriage. If you have a group of employees with 2 bosses - it causes conflict. Which boss' items take higher priority? How do you choose who to follow?"

Just because you have never seen it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Right?

I am an accountant and when I worked for partnerships with 2 or more partners, everything ran great! The biz was profitable, and the employees were happy. Who do you choose to follow, as an employee? Whoever your supervisor is. That might not even BE one of the partners. But who do you choose to follow, as a partner? You don't. You manage the business together.

I promise, this model can exist. It simply requires the right partners.



"What happens in a marriage with two drivers? What happens when you disagree about a big decision? In my marriage, that isn't an issue."

We use the Policy of Joint Agreement. Which is no simple feat. It requires us to find a decision that we both enthusiastically agree on. It requires loving, supportive communication. And in the end, we both win. So it isn't an issue in my marriage, either. 



"Before you think that my husband is some knuckle-dragging cave dweller......So I'm hardly suffering personally or professionally in being a submissive wife and relinquishing control to my husband in making choices."

Please don't confuse me with Lady. I can see her points, but I have also already told you that I admire your way, too. 



"I'm still unclear on how being treasured or cherished is passive as well so maybe it's just a lack of understanding all the way around."

Again...you quoted Lady, not me.

I need to be treasured and cherished. It is part of my emotional needs, which are all listed out in the Emotional Needs Questionaires we completed for each other, telling each other how we both need our needs to be met.


----------



## TCSRedhead

Faithful Wife said:


> Red said: "I've honestly never seen the 'true partnership' model work in business nor in marriage. If you have a group of employees with 2 bosses - it causes conflict. Which boss' items take higher priority? How do you choose who to follow?"
> 
> Just because you have never seen it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Right?
> 
> I am an accountant and when I worked for partnerships with 2 or more partners, everything ran great! The biz was profitable, and the employees were happy. Who do you choose to follow, as an employee? Whoever your supervisor is. That might not even BE one of the partners. But who do you choose to follow, as a partner? You don't. You manage the business together.
> 
> I promise, this model can exist. It simply requires the right partners.
> 
> "What happens in a marriage with two drivers? What happens when you disagree about a big decision? In my marriage, that isn't an issue."
> 
> We use the Policy of Joint Agreement. Which is no simple feat. It requires us to find a decision that we both enthusiastically agree on. It requires loving, supportive communication. And in the end, we both win. So it isn't an issue in my marriage, either.


I'm not saying it can't or doesn't work for others. I think I've even said that a few times. 

The model you quote in the above scenario indicates assigning a position of authority, meaning someone is the 'boss'. That's what I was getting to in my rambling. Someone takes the chair where the buck stops and makes the decisions. It can't be divided well between two or more people normally.

What happens in a marriage where you can't come up with a solution where you both feel enthusiastic? I am truly inquiring on this because to be honest while that may happen a majority of the time, what happens when you both feel very differently about a decision? I just see it so much simpler when you have one person who has that as their responsibility. 

My apologies if you were offended at the fact I was responding to both you and Lady in my post. It was about efficiency on my part and not meant to offend.


----------



## Faithful Wife

"What happens in a marriage where you can't come up with a solution where you both feel enthusiastic? I am truly inquiring on this because to be honest while that may happen a majority of the time, what happens when you both feel very differently about a decision? I just see it so much simpler when you have one person who has that as their responsibility."

The POJA says that until you reach agreement, you do nothing.

So that is your motivation to reach an agreement in some cases.

OR....it can become a point that both spouses realize is something that doesn't really need to happen at all.

The POJA takes some practice and skill, but doing it at all presupposes that both spouses have agreed to try to find agreement on decisions. Just the act of agreeing to use this policy causes a really great bonding to occur, where you are both saying that what is best for the marriage, versus best for the individual, is what you both want.

When you say "The model you quote in the above scenario indicates assigning a position of authority, meaning someone is the 'boss' "....I don't really know what you are meaning. I have already said that I have worked for partnerships who did NOT need to assign someone to a position of authority. All it requires is the right partners. Some people may not be able to handle such an eglatarian type of business, but many do.

No worries on the dual responding.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

TCSRedhead said:


> Not all men are worthy, the right man is worthy.
> 
> If my husband had been a dolt and I felt I could not trust him to do the right thing for me, our marriage and our family, I wouldn't have married him.


 I'm lovin' all your posts on here TCSRedhead.....I so identify .... :smthumbup: 

I'll be the 1st to admit I'd likely be impossible to live with if my husband was an immature wreckless demeaning _______. 

My mother married an Alcoholic...his ranting & raving got so bad one time when I was over there...riding her, riding me..... I hauled off & knocked him to the ground.... he was a severe case of Obnoxiousness at times.. (not one of my better moments)...but I can be very soft and sweet too...

I'd never fare well with a man I didn't RESPECT ....My temper would surely be my downfall .... submission would never get off the ground....without something to latch on to.... believe in.... something to WORK WITH.... admiration for a man's character - showing HE is capable of being "the Man". 

"Submission" or whatever one wants to term it...Faithful Wife described their dynamics as ..."*submitting to *"....works for me ! 

When a woman has the type of man who'd give his last breath for his wife & family....putting their needs above his own- just because that is the type of Man HE IS....

A man who shows Responsibility in all he sets his hands to.... his word can be counted on......who'd stay up all night ..if need be...to fix his wife's car if she needed it the next day so she'd be safe on the road........ whatever it takes....such things make all the difference in this world....in marital happiness... when we feel safe / protected in his arms... knowing he has our backs... and in this....it's our Joy to have his as well.



> *LadyofTheLake said:* I don't want to be taken care of. I'm not that passive. When you say you want to feel treasured and cherished.....well, I don't. That is too passive and complacent for me. I'm not a decoration or a treasure to be cherished. I am responsible for my own happiness....Dh is responsible for his.


 This sounds so utterly COLD to me, so UNromantic / Room-matish .....If I carried this attitude in the smallest way... one thing I know...my husband would be a miserable man...because he enjoys his role as the Man I described above.. to RIP That from him, tell him I didn't want it, didn't need it... it would hurt him.... I don't feel that is a flaw either. 



> In fact there has been times when he's asked for my input *and I refuse to give it* if I feel it's too personal an issue. If it's something I think he should deal with on his own...I'm not going to take responsibility for him just as I won't allow him to take it for me.


 this would never work for us either......we just don't look at life like this at all.. we are a team.... not independent but "interdependent" ..we lift each other up, we brainstorm together... we weigh the pros & cons .....there is no blaming if something fell through, we know we did it as a UNIT -united going forth.... I happily serve his needs, he happily serves mine...it is a JOY....

Also we greatly value "the sharing" -there is no place we can't go with each other in this respect....nothing too personal. This means so much to me, as well as it does to him. 

Funny how different people are.....I can see you now thinking >> 



> *Women are supposed to be tender and soft and feminine and submissive* and men are supposed to be strong and fearless and decisive? What rot. I haven't been soft a day in my life and don't plan on it anytime soon.....


 I so enjoy playing the soft tender feminine wife ...makes me feel good about myself... since my unruly temper can rise at times....so I embrace this side of my character....it's a pleasure & flows naturally -given how he IS with me, how he treats me.....

But yet... no one would ever call me passive.......My husband would surely :rofl: at that one....


----------



## TCSRedhead

Faithful Wife said:


> Who do you choose to follow, as an employee? Whoever your supervisor is.


This was the assignation of authority, aka boss, that I was speaking about in my post. Meaning that in the model you were describing, there was some designation of roles. 

Or maybe that's just the way I'm reading it. 

I'll iterate again - I know not everyone likes or agrees with what works in my marriage but it works for us. 

I can at least say that you were respectful in your responses and hopefully I've been the same in return.


----------



## always_alone

Tall Average Guy said:


> I wonder if he agrees.





COguy said:


> I think you're setting up a false dichotomy/straw man, where you associate traditional _*[fe]*_male roles of leadership with being a power hungry warmonger.





Shadow_Nirvana said:


> Dominating became domineering and intimidating; Submitting became being a doormat. Such is the way of modern feminist mumbo jumbo.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Red - As I said...as an employee, your supervisor may not even BE one of the partners. The partners may have hired a supervisor to handle the employees.

Or - the partners might be the only employees.

I do not see where possible employees even fit into the partnership analogy to marriage. Who would the employees be? In the marriage-as-a-business model I am discussing, the two partners (spouses) are the only two people we are concerned with.

And of course I am respectful! I loooooove a good love story, such as yours.


----------



## TCSRedhead

SimplyAmorous said:


> I'm lovin' all your posts on here TCSRedhead.....I so identify .... :smthumbup:
> 
> I'll be the 1st to admit I'd likely be impossible to live with if my husband was an immature wreckless demeaning _______.
> 
> My mother married an Alcoholic...his ranting & raving got so bad one time when I was over there...riding her, riding me..... I hauled off & knocked him to the ground.... he was a severe case of Obnoxiousness at times.. (not one of my better moments)...but I can be very soft and sweet too...
> 
> I'd never fare well with a man I didn't RESPECT ....My temper would surely be my downfall .... submission would never get off the ground....without something to latch on to.... believe in.... something to WORK WITH.... admiration for a man's character - showing HE is capable of being "the Man".
> 
> "Submission" or whatever one wants to term it...Faithful Wife described their dynamics as ..."*submitting to *"....works for me !
> 
> When a woman has the type of man who'd give his last breath for his wife & family....putting their needs above his own- just because that is the type of Man HE IS....
> 
> A man who shows Responsibility in all he sets his hands to.... his word can be counted on......who'd stay up all night ..if need be...to fix his wife's car if she needed it the next day so she'd be safe on the road........ whatever it takes....such things make all the difference in this world....in marital happiness... when we feel safe / protected in his arms... knowing he has our backs... and in this....it's our Joy to have his as well.
> 
> This sounds so utterly COLD to me, so UNromantic / Room-matish .....If I carried this attitude in the smallest way... one thing I know...my husband would be a miserable man...because he enjoys his role as the Man I described above.. to RIP That from him, tell him I didn't want it, didn't need it... it would hurt him.... I don't feel that is a flaw either.
> 
> this would never work for us either......we just don't look at life like this at all.. we are a team.... not independent but "interdependent" ..we lift each other up, we brainstorm together... we weigh the pros & cons .....there is no blaming if something fell through, we know we did it as a UNIT -united going forth.... I happily serve his needs, he happily serves mine...it is a JOY....
> 
> Also we greatly value "the sharing" -there is no place we can't go with each other in this respect....nothing too personal. This means so much to me, as well as it does to him.
> 
> Funny how different people are.....I can see you now thinking >>
> 
> 
> 
> I so enjoy playing the soft tender feminine wife ...makes me feel good about myself... since my unruly temper can rise at times....so I embrace this side of my character....it's a pleasure & flows naturally -given how he IS with me, how he treats me.....
> 
> But yet... no one would ever call me passive.......My husband would surely :rofl: at that one....


I think you and I are probably a lot alike. I am definitely not a passive person by any means. 

I cannot imagine ANY issue that we could not discuss or that is TOO personal. He's my husband. We've cared for each other during surgeries, illnesses and all sorts of situations. We've talked about sexual experiences, financial matters, political and religious views. He was my friend long before we ever dated so that may have altered the dynamic as well. 

I don't see the role I play in our marriage as 'lesser' at all. How can I be lesser when he puts my needs first?


----------



## Ikaika

sticking to the title of the thread:

1. I know Laird Hamilton (the "weatherman") personally (I grew up on Kauai and surfed with him)... I think Gabby Reece (who I don't know) should be awarded a medal for sticking with this guy.

2. I just downloaded the book... into the third chapter. I think some of you may be surprised by what you read. I am reserving any comment to the end. 

So far from what I have read and know about the "weatherman", that single comment may actually be blown way out of proportion given that there is so much other stuff in the book.


ETA: it really is a book about a decision she made to make her married life work on so many levels. And, yet this one statement is all anyone wants to discuss. Read the book.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Lol,

Some women on this thread have absolutely no problem with a man surrendering to them, BUT,
They have serious problems surrendering to a man's leadership.
Yup,
When its time for them to reciprocate,
Problems start.

I've NEVER seen any vehicle driven by two drivers at the same time.. 

Reminds me of my sister when we were kids.
Whenever we played one of her competitive game with her, and she realized she was loosing, she would try to change the rules of the game to suit her, or take her game and walk...
lol.

BTW, She got divorced young after a string of affairs and a pregnancy for a casual affair partner...


----------



## Caribbean Man

TCSRedhead said:


> .* Someone takes the chair where the buck stops and makes the decisions. It can't be divided well between two or more people normally.*


And that^^^ is MY responsibility in our marriage.
That's why I lead.
The risk is MY responsibility and,
The blame rests with ME.

Every night before we go to bed there is the security check. We both agreed to both check doors etc. to make sure everything is locked.
Most times she forgets,
But I cannot afford to forget that, because the safety of our home and person is at stake.
By default , the responsibility is mine whether or not she remembers to check .
So I cannot forget.
This is an example of leadership in our marriage. Taking responsibility , even when she forgets or slips up.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

SimplyAmorous said:


> A man who shows Responsibility in all he sets his hands to.... his word can be counted on......who'd stay up all night ..if need be...to fix his wife's car if she needed it the next day so she'd be safe on the road........ whatever it takes....such things make all the difference in this world....in marital happiness... when we feel safe / protected in his arms... knowing he has our backs... and in this....it's our Joy to have his as well.


See, my hubs IS this kind of man. He is a true family man and would do anything for any one of us. He works hard every day and I DO respect him. I respect him more than any other man I know. But I still don't want him in charge of running my life, of making my decisions or telling me what I can or can't, should or shouldn't do. I balk at the thought of it. Thankfully, he's never shown any interest in being like that. I guess I wouldn't have fallen for him if he was. 



> This sounds so utterly COLD to me, so UNromantic / Room-matish .....If I carried this attitude in the smallest way... one thing I know...my husband would be a miserable man...because he enjoys his role as the Man I described above.. to RIP That from him, tell him I didn't want it, didn't need it... it would hurt him.... I don't feel that is a flaw either.


He can be that kind of man without having you under his thumb. He can be a worthy and responsible man and leave you to be a responsible and capable woman. The two are not mutually exclusive by any means. 


> this would never work for us either......we just don't look at life like this at all.. we are a team.... not independent but "interdependent" ..we lift each other up, we brainstorm together... we weigh the pros & cons .....there is no blaming if something fell through, we know we did it as a UNIT -united going forth.... I happily serve his needs, he happily serves mine...it is a JOY....
> 
> Also we greatly value "the sharing" -there is no place we can't go with each other in this respect....nothing too personal. This means so much to me, as well as it does to him.
> 
> Funny how different people are.....I can see you now thinking >>
> 
> 
> 
> I was wondering if this site had a puke smiley.....some of these threads really need one!!!!
> 
> 
> .


----------



## TCSRedhead

coffee4me said:


> SA and Red, In your relationships you have said you are submissive. When you both speak of your relationships they sound like great partnerships. Even when Gabby was speaking in the interviews I saw, I failed to see how she (or you) yeild to your husbands authority and are submissive.
> 
> Red you said that if there was a big decision and you could not agree that it is easier for you to let him make the decision. Does this really happen in your marriage?
> 
> Can someone give me examples where you submit to your husbands authority. I'm trying to understand this dynamic.


It's very rare that we don't or wouldn't agree to be honest. 

I can give a very clear, very big case where this has happened. We purchased his mom's house in an effort to stave off her bankruptcy. This was something done because he wished to do this to help her. 

He also worked long past when he should have after his first back surgery. 

I think some folks are interpreting the submissive wife as someone who has every single move dictated by her overbearing husband and it really isn't like that at all.


----------



## Caribbean Man

coffee4me said:


> Can someone give me examples where you submit to your husbands authority. I'm trying to understand this dynamic.


I think somehow the word authority and submission is tainting the way you all view this matter.
Your husband is not your father.,he cannot tell you what to do.
He cannot force you to accept anything.

I'll give an example of something that happened to us years ago.

I got an opportunity to purchase a property in a an area I knew had potential ,a few years ago, after a woman I knew had a nasty divorce. 
It was priced for quick sale, just $250K.
My wife was very risk averse ,she had this inexplicable phobia about any type of risk associated with business or money.
When I mentioned it to her and showed her the possibilities, she refused to even hear me. She was adamant, 
She said NO.
I was disappointed , but I decided not to pursue the deal.
Someone we both knew bought it, flipped it and sold it for $1 million...

Recently I mentioned to her that I wanted to take advantage of another business opportunity that I saw.
This time she was different, she is still very risk averse, but this time she tells me that its up to me , she completely trusts my judgement.


----------



## Caribbean Man

coffee4me said:


> But doesn't she do the same for you? Surely there is something you often forget? I don't see this example as being leadership and submission.


That's the point coffee!

She reciprocates it all the time...
We both have each other's back.
But if I were to depend on her to make sure things are secure at night , even though its part her responsibility, whenever there's a slip up I would HAVE to take the blame.
With leadership comes great responsibility.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> Hmmmm, yes, and to you this is a masculine role?


No, I never said its a masculine role.
I said even though we both agree to do it TOGETHER,ultimately, its MY RESPONSIBILITY.

I cannot sit in the TV room ,looking at a movie and tell her to go lock the doors and shut the windows...I get up and tell her I'm going to do it. Even if she said she's done it already, I double check it. Just in case.
Does that make her less of a woman?
Or does it mean I take that responsibility seriously?

Why is that so hard to understand?


----------



## TiggyBlue

coffee4me said:


> Thanks for you reply, I don't see the submissive wife as being dictated to but by definition it is yielding to anothers authority and I've yet to see an example of that in what we've discussed in this thread.
> 
> I actually wouldn't view your examples as being submissive, I'd view it as you being giving and supportive in allowing your husband to make decisions that pertain to his health and family even thou there are some consequences to yourself. I guess its all how we interpret things.


:iagree:
I think the terminology used is what throws some off.


----------



## Faithful Wife

CM said: "I cannot sit in the TV room ,looking at a movie and tell her to go lock the doors and shut the windows...I get up and tell her I'm going to do it. Even if she said she's done it already, I double check it. Just in case.
Does that make her less of a woman?
Or does it mean I take that responsibility seriously?

*Why is that so hard to understand*?"


Because division of labor has nothing to do with submission, authority, or even leading.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> Shouldn't you trust if she's said she's done it she did? Trusting your spouse is a huge thing brought up, even in this thread.
> 
> I was just curious as in my relationship I make most of the decisions, check the locks and turn down the heat.


But Trenton, if you and me have some traits in common, then you would know very well, that its not that you don't trust your spouse to do a good job.
It is that you PERSONALLY take responsibility for these matters under your purview and control.
You don't like things to get out of control if you could have done something about it.

Am I right?


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> CM said: "I cannot sit in the TV room ,looking at a movie and tell her to go lock the doors and shut the windows...I get up and tell her I'm going to do it. Even if she said she's done it already, I double check it. Just in case.
> Does that make her less of a woman?
> Or does it mean I take that responsibility seriously?
> 
> *Why is that so hard to understand*?"
> 
> 
> Because division of labor has nothing to do with submission, authority, or even leading.



It is not division of labour.
How does checking the lock equate labour?
In fact, we have ABSOLUTELY no division of labour in our home.
I cook , I do the dishes, I do the laundry, and guess what?
She does too.
It is about taking personal responsibility for the safety and well being of both of us.


So if I hear a funny noise in the house during the night, should I tell her to go downstairs and check?
It is my responsibility to look after her physical safety, not a "division of chores."


----------



## TCSRedhead

coffee4me said:


> Thanks for you reply, I don't see the submissive wife as being dictated to but by definition it is yielding to anothers authority and I've yet to see an example of that in what we've discussed in this thread.
> 
> I actually wouldn't view your examples as being submissive, I'd view it as you being giving and supportive in allowing your husband to make decisions that pertain to his health and family even thou there are some consequences to yourself. I guess its all how we interpret things.


I would agree - just because someone has the authority doesn't mean they have to waive it around and make it a point of managing every minute detail. 

My husband does have the authority in our marriage. Should he say that we would not move this summer, we would not move. 

In the decision to purchase his mom's house, I didn't agree with that decision but did yield to his authority in that choice.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> *It is my hope that he eventually discovers, embraces and is the man I know he already is but won't give himself permission to be so that we can make decisions 100% together. *That's my ideal anyhow.


In our marriage, this ^^^is what led to the big conflict in the first place. I expected her to do exactly that, and sometimes I got impatient, and we would argue and she would start acting out.

But what the counsellor told me was that people are different, and their experiences help shape them.People develop at their own pace, we should allow the the freedom to do so.
You understand things better than him and have a wider scope of vision.
You are in the leadership position because of it
But to whom much is given, much is required.
Even to trust beyond what _you_ can see. It is a risk you have to take.


----------



## Wiserforit

Faithful Wife said:


> "You don't hear men incessantly asserting how independent and confident they are and how every electron orbiting the nucleus of every atom in their partner is only with their permission."
> 
> I believe there was a 2,000 post Game thread where many men said exactly this.


No, it is the control-freaky end that is the fallacy of logic I am demonstrating. 

If control-freakiness reaches a clinical level then whichever spouse is perpetrating it uses every means they can like controlling the finances, refusing to allow the spouse friends outside the family, etc. 

And the irony of these clinical levels especially is that it is actually the tremendous insecurity inside of them that leads to this control-freak behavior. 

That is actually a point made by this female athlete - that confidence is demonstrated in not feeling the need to war over being in control of everything.


----------



## Adex

Deejo said:


> Dude ... Really?


Yes really. It takes the husband to act more dominant and the wife to act more beta. In this way, there is no question about how the marriage dynamic should be. The two will not argue as much because each are not fighting for power.

If both are trying to be even and be the alpha, then there will just be a lot of conflict.

I suppose an alpha wife and beta husband would have the same beneficial affect, but being the alpha in the relationship has the most benefits.


----------



## Tall Average Guy

Trenton said:


> It's hard to trust someone who does not trust themselves.


Consider that you not trusting him prevents him from trusting himself.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Wiserforit said:


> That is actually a point made by this female athlete - that *confidence is demonstrated in not feeling the need to war over being in control of everything.*


Very few people understand this^^^. 
If you know your strengths , you don't have to prove that you're strong.


----------



## Faithful Wife

CM said: "It is not division of labour.
How does checking the lock equate labour?
In fact, we have ABSOLUTELY no division of labour in our home.
I cook , I do the dishes, I do the laundry, and guess what?
She does too.
It is about taking personal responsibility for the safety and well being of both of us."




My husband is out of town tonight. Who do you suppose will check the doors tonight? In my house, this is a "chore" because it is something one of us must do EACH night. That's just about checking the locks....but now on to....

"So if I hear a funny noise in the house during the night, should I tell her to go downstairs and check?
It is my responsibility to look after her physical safety, not a "division of chores." "

So you are more physically suited to looking after the physical safety of the house and family in the case of a bump in the night....totally true! But that is not a chore. 

Locking up the house at night IS a chore as it is something one of you must do each night (and also turn down the lights, turn off the heat/air, let in/out pets, etc), and I see no reason that you doing it or her doing it has anything to do with submission.

Even you being the one who will have to protect the house and family isn't her being submissive to you in any way, is it? It is simply a matter of who is best suited. If you were laid up after a surgery or something, she would have to grab the baseball bat and check out the bump in the night, correct? Or she could call the police, the neighbors...but whatever she had to do, she would have to do it. She would prefer you to be able bodied and do it because you are less likely to be killed by a predator than she is. Yet she will still attempt to protect her own life if necessary, as all mammals will do.

To me, this is the same as saying that if we have babies, I will be the one who breastfeeds, as I am physically suited to that...and if I am unable, he will need to grab a bottle and step up to that duty.

Where is the submission?


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> *LadyoftheLake said*: See, my hubs IS this kind of man. He is a true family man and would do anything for any one of us. He works hard every day and I DO respect him. I respect him more than any other man I know. *But I still don't want him in charge of running my life, of making my decisions or telling me what I can or can't, should or shouldn't do.* I balk at the thought of it. Thankfully, he's never shown any interest in being like that. I guess I wouldn't have fallen for him if he was.


 Since I personally have never experienced a controlling man / or demanding....but one who does allow me to enjoy my life to the fullest....I've just never FELT like this...I can only imagine what that might be like... THe thing that saves me is ......What I enjoy the most IS - *being with him anyway!*....*doing things together & as a family.* ...Maybe that's why we don't have many issues here, I've never felt he was interfering/ pushing... I enjoy his want and attention of me.

For instance, I could care less about Girls Night Out, not my thing, I might do that with friends once a year... I'd rather go out with him over them every single time...

If I was planning on doing something/anything ...he'd be the 1st to hear about it...*I'd want his input*, .. there's never been a time he didn't know exactly where I was, when I was coming home.. stuff like that... but that is given *willingly* on my end.. he's never had to push, or demand......

A man wouldn't have to demand to know all that much from me -cause I'd give it freely anyhow! If I didn't give enough in this respect, well -something is wrong with him. 

When I hear men on this forum talk about there wives not letting them know where they are, or feeling they are hiding something and the woman bulks, I can feel how that man may FEEL in that... I wouldn't like it... 

And in this way, it's the same with my husband, he can make plans with the guys at work, he'll call me up, whatever, heck he has them call & run it by me sometimes...but he is careful to not allow it to conflict with our family schedule, if he is needed , or to miss a kids event.. I manage the Calendar - with this kid going here, that one there, another at the neighbors, when to pick that one up, etc. 

Really we're more like a Partnership.... very flexible for us both to live with the freedoms we enjoy -but yet accountable to each other. Not sure how to explain...neither of us feel smothered, or bossed around. We take delight that the other wants to KNOW these things & be involved. 

.But IF HE PUT HIS FOOT DOWN ON ME, against something, I would YIELD...... I can't say this happens all that much cause we seem to think so much ALIKE most might find it hard to believe....again like >>


> *TCSRedhead said:* *It's very rare that we don't or wouldn't agree to be honest. *





> *coffee4me said:* Red you said that if there was a big decision and you could not agree that it is easier for you to let him make the decision. Does this really happen in your marriage?


 It happens but truthfully I do have to wrack my brain .... the examples I give most, which I mentioned in my 1st post on this thread was.. when I haven't listened, I ended up regretting it, once we lost $500 to a friend because I believed he'd double our $$.. this was before we were married mind you (I was probably 19 yrs old)... I should have listened to him...he was smarter than me..

Not listening when he told me to slow down driving to Disney , I got a Speeding ticket.. stupid stuff.. .Live & learn....Once I didn't listen when he told me to quit talking to my Aunt & her husband after their fall out, they kept calling me, I got called into court for that.... didn't have to testify...but geeze, should have listened to MY HUSBAND [email protected]#$% Got an unlisted # after that & cut them off. 

So yeah...he has been smarter than I ... in our past -when I SHOULD have yielded.... Though I have stepped up & convinced him of some good moves for us as well....that could have saved our butts....like when his Dad wanted us to hand over thousands of $$'s in TRUST, no contracts in getting our house -to his sister.. I was not going for that... I wrote my own Contract up ..... took it to a Lawyer and had it modified, that was wisdom....not dealing in a world of hand shakes here. 

My husband always says I am the "brains of the outfit" - though I can have a lead foot on occasion.... get too involved with people where I need to cut them off... 



> *coffee4me said*: I actually wouldn't view your examples as being submissive, I'd view it as you being giving and supportive in allowing your husband to make decisions that pertain to his health and family even thou there are some consequences to yourself. I guess its all how we interpret things.


 YOU are likely very right on this... in regards to REDHeads marriage and MINE.......

For instance, we've never disagreed on where to live, a house to buy, how to discipline, Home improvements- we'll shop together and throw ideas at each other , get prices...plan.. where to vacation..(he lets me do all of that)..... I always worked around his schedule to manage our living & family life.... we are both savers, so no arguments over money either. If anything, I am a little cheaper over him.



> *Adex said*: I suppose an alpha wife and beta husband would have the same beneficial affect, but being the alpha in the relationship has the most benefits.


Anyone who knows us in real life would say I was the ALPHA and he is the BETA...but yet I am NOT a career woman, I am dependent on him.... I have great respect for him ....We just "work" even if we're not the most common scenario..... I prefer HIS type... he prefers MY type...


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> To me, this is the same as saying that if we have babies, I will be the one who breastfeeds, as I am physically suited to that...and if I am unable, he will need to grab a bottle and step up to that duty.
> 
> Where is the submission?


Ok,
lol., I tried to make this short and simple, but I guess I'll need to get down to fine details.

So here goes.

Last year my wife wanted to go spend a weekend on a resort island with one of her girlfriends.
I told her that I was not comfortable with the idea because there was just two of them.
I told her I would prefer if more people went , or if she got her sister to go with them.
I don't know that friend very well.
She got upset and threw a tantrum which I ignored.
When she came to her senses, she apologized and said they would try to reorganize the trip.
They did, and her sisters are going with them, and I am much happier,and comfortable. 
I told her that now I have no problem with their trip. They leave this Friday.

Last year , when they first planned the trip I voiced my displeasure AND SHE SUBMITTED. She wanted to go, but IMO, the security arrangements were not good enough.
This year she took my concerns into consideration, fixed everything and I SUBMITTED. I am now comfortable that if any emergency arises, she would be protected.

Is that an ok example?


----------



## Faithful Wife

CM, my husband "forbids" me to wear certain clothes in public without him, and I happily submit to this.

Again, just because I submit on this one thing or even many things...doesn't mean this is a "female submission to male authority led relationship".

He submits to me on many things as well.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Caribbean Man said:


> Ok,
> lol., I tried to make this short and simple, but I guess I'll need to get down to fine details.
> 
> So here goes.
> 
> Last year my wife wanted to go spend a weekend on a resort island with one of her girlfriends.
> I told her that I was not comfortable with the idea because it was just two of them.
> I told her I would prefer if more people went , or if she got her sister to go with them.
> I don't know that friend very well.
> She got upset and threw a tantrum which I ignored.
> When she came to her senses, she apologized and said they would try to reorganize the trip.
> They did, and her sisters are going with them, and I am much happier, I told her that I now have no problem with their trip. They leave this Friday.
> 
> Last year , when they first planned the trip I voiced my displeasure AND SHE SUBMITTED.
> This year she took my concerns into consideration, fixed everything and I SUBMITTED.
> 
> Is that an ok example?


Why do you think you have any right to have a say in where she goes or who she goes with? How exactly did you submit in this case? You sound condescending and arrogant by referring to your wife's displeasure with you as a "tantrum".

Were my Dh to overstep himself like that I'd tell him to go pound sand.


----------



## Faithful Wife

CM: In fact, my husband has many rules I must follow that some of my girlfriends make gag faces about. They actually think he has somehow brain washed me. HA!

Yet, I have just as many rules he must follow.

When it is known that either of us can pull the "I simply don't want you to do it, please don't question me" card at any time, we call that putting each other's needs as our priority.

Where is the "male authority female submission" again exactly?


----------



## TCSRedhead

LadyOfTheLake said:


> Why do you think you have any right to have a say in where she goes or who she goes with? How exactly did you submit in this case? You sound condescending and arrogant by referring to your wife's displeasure with you as a "tantrum".
> 
> Were my Dh to overstep himself like that I'd tell him to go pound sand.


I'm sure you don't mean to, but you come across as an attack with this. He explained that as she had originally presented the trip, it was a safety/security concern. When she corrected that, he submitted to agree for her to go. 

Just because someone else's marriage doesn't fit yours doesn't mean it isn't a good one.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## TiggyBlue

I personally don't find any of that as submission just respecting your partners boundaries or input in a situation.


----------



## Caribbean Man

LadyOfTheLake said:


> Why do you think you have any right to have a say in where she goes or who she goes with? How exactly did you submit in this case? You sound condescending and arrogant by referring to your wife's displeasure with you as a "tantrum".
> 
> Were my Dh to overstep himself like that I'd tell him to go pound sand.


Or, that's simple.
Because SHE ALSO HAS A RIGHT TO SAY WHERE I CAN GO OR WHO I GO WITH.
She does not like strip clubs, bars, discos , casinos, drag racing meets, bachelor parties , people who smoke weed ,etc.
I have absolutely no problem with these places, BUT MY WIFE DOES.SO I DON'T GO TO THEM. I SUBMIT TO HER.
Get my drift?

BTW,
You weren't even there in our bedroom when she threw a tantrum and walked outside. And I said that I voiced MY displeasure at HER plans...
Soooooo, exactly how do you know that she didn't throw a tantrum?:scratchhead:


----------



## Caribbean Man

TCSRedhead said:


> I'm sure you don't mean to, but you come across as an attack with this. He explained that as she had originally presented the trip, it was a safety/security concern. When she corrected that, he submitted to agree for her to go.
> 
> Just because someone else's marriage doesn't fit yours doesn't mean it isn't a good one.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


My concern were that there was a report in the news that there had been a number of rapes on the island.
IMO, I thought that two of them going alone put them at high risk.
If a number of them went, then there is more safety in numbers.


----------



## TCSRedhead

Caribbean Man said:


> My concern were that there was a report in the news that there had been a number of rapes on the island.
> IMO, I thought that two of them going alone put them at high risk.
> If a number of them went, then there is more safety in numbers.


I totally understood that.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> CM: In fact, my husband has many rules I must follow that some of my girlfriends make gag faces about. They actually think he has somehow brain washed me. HA!
> 
> Yet, I have just as many rules he must follow.
> 
> When it is known that either of us can pull the "I simply don't want you to do it, please don't question me" card at any time, we call that putting each other's needs as our priority.
> 
> Where is the "male authority female submission" again exactly?


There is no " male authority female submission."
As I have said ad nauseam in this thread, reciprocity is what works. Both partners must submit to each other's wishes at different times, and in different areas of their marriage.

But somebody must take the leadership position at sometime. It doesn't mean that the male always leads. It could be interchangeable like in the example I gave you earlier on.
If both you and your husband decide to drive your car at the same time, it will crash.
If both of you decide to sit in the rear seat and talk about driving the car, you cannot go anywhere.

But if both of you decide that he would drive to go, and you would drive to return, or you take the wheels to go and return, then there is progress.
Both of you cannot drive at the same time.


----------



## Catherine602

Have not read all of the post so if i repeat please forgive me. The problem, according to what I've read here is that women have unreasonable expectations and they exert control over their sexuality in marriage.

Turn the clock back a hundred years when a woman's existence depended on men. Women had kids, cared for them and the home and the social obligations. 

She obeyed the man who makes it possible for her and her kids to eat and have a home. Women were not expected to enjoy sex, she did it for her husband and to have kids. 

Men are having a very difficult time dealing with their changing role in marriage. They are expected to do things that were never required before - communicate, adjust emotionally, care for kids, do chores and sexually satisfy their wife. 

I really don't think men want a submissive wife, they want the wife they would have had 100 years ago with the bonus of a second salary.

Women today are challenging. They don't shut up, cook and fvck. 

From my point of view, there is no going back. If you think about it, the changes have positively impacted 55% of the population in developed countires. They were needed and fair. 

It has impacted our mothers, daughters, sisters, aunts. Not only some random woman in a dance class who refuses to follow.


----------



## Caribbean Man

TiggyBlue said:


> I personally don't find any of that as submission just respecting your partners boundaries or input in a situation.


But you agree, that you are not bound to respect it?
You know that you cannot be forced to respect anybody's boundaries?

So,
If you choose to accept another person's opinion above yours, then you have submitted to their opinion.

This forum has rules for posting.
We ALL have submitted to their rules, in order to keep posting.
Yes or no?

Likewise, in order to keep a relationship going ,sometimes both parties have to submit to each other's wishes.


----------



## TiggyBlue

Caribbean Man said:


> But you agree, that you are not bound to respect it?
> You know that you cannot be forced to respect anybody's boundaries?
> 
> So,
> If you choose to accept another person's opinion above yours, then you have submitted to their opinion.
> 
> This forum has rules for posting.
> We ALL have submitted to their rules, in order to keep posting.
> Yes or no?
> 
> Likewise, in order to keep a relationship going ,sometimes both parties have to submit to each other's wishes.



I agree but I still think the term 'submit' is what get's some defensive, rather than the actions or example's that are have been given.


----------



## Caribbean Man

TiggyBlue said:


> I agree but I still think the term 'submit' is what get's some defensive, rather than the actions or example's that are have been given.


"...*A rose by any other name is still a rose*..."
Romeo & Juliet. William Shakespeare.

Yes?


----------



## TiggyBlue

Caribbean Man said:


> "...*A rose by any other name is still a rose*..."
> Romeo & Juliet. William Shakespeare.
> 
> Yes?


But it's a action not a object, leaves much to interpretation.


----------



## Faithful Wife

CM: "Both of you cannot drive at the same time."

And as I have said many times, yes we can. It is called the Policy of Joint Agreement.

Marriage is not a car, it is not even close to a good analogy. There is nothing similar to a moving vehicle and a marriage. There IS a lot of similarity between a marriage and a business, however.

You don't sound like you have the type of marriage that Gabby does. You seem to be totally happy to lead or be lead, as the situation calls for.

To me, it seems like we are saying the same thing but that you want to insist that one of you is leading at all times. I don't see it that way at all. If you have to use the car analogy, then the only way I see it as applicable is if the car is parked, like an antique car that never leaves a museum.


----------



## Caribbean Man

TiggyBlue said:


> But it's a action not a object, leaves much to interpretation.


And a person's perception is more often than not,_their_ reality..

Agree?


----------



## TiggyBlue

Caribbean Man said:


> And a person's perception is more often than not,_their_ reality..
> 
> Agree?


Totally.


----------



## Catherine602

I would not advise women to enter a submissive relationship for many reasons. 

Men are no more perfect than women. Some cannot be trusted to lead. In fact, for all the talk of men spreading seeds and needing new vj and having roaming genes, a woman would have to be addled-brained to give up control over her life and that of her children to such a disloyal, unstable, selfish being. :scratchhead:

What happens when the leader falters and cheats, leaves the dependent family to fend for themselves. This will happen to 50% or more of marriages. 

What do these submissive women do when they are jetisoned? They and their kids have big problems. Read some of the threads from women who were submissive to husbands who decided to leave for something new. 

It is never good to get into a position where your partner is too sure that you cannot leave. There are extraordinary people who would not abuse the position but most of us are ordinary. 

When we are too sure of a partner, we have a tendency to take them for granted. There is no need to pay much attention because they are not going anywhere. No woman should get into that position.. 

out of choice, i am submissive. However, I did not have more kids than can handle on my own, make enough money to support myself and my kids, if needed, keep up independant social contacts, stay weight appropriate and fit, and take care of my looks like I may have to date again next month.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Catherine602 said:


> I would not advise women to enter a submissive relationship for many reasons.


And would you suggest that a man should enter in a submissive relationship with a woman who makes more money than him , is better educated than him, and is better suited to lead than him?


----------



## Faithful Wife

CM....WHY did you say that? Catherine DID NOT say that the woman should lead!!!


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> CM....WHY did you say that? Catherine DID NOT say that the woman should lead!!!


And I never said that she did.
But there are women right here on TAM who are leaders in their marriages.
I see nothing wrong with that.
What I'm asking is , should men enter into a submissive marriage with such a woman?
if yes, why?
If no,
Why?
I think that's a fair question.

My personal opinion is that people should only get married if they are compatible. 
Anythings else , is heading for failure.


----------



## Faithful Wife

CM "What I'm asking is , should men enter into a submissive marriage with such a woman?
if yes, why?
If no,
Why?
I think that's a fair question."

Ok it is a fair question, but it would be a fair question to anyone as well as to Catherine...since she never said anything even remotely suggesting that a man should enter into a sub relationship with a woman.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> Ok it is a fair question, but it would be a fair question to anyone as well as to Catherine...since she never said anything even remotely suggesting that a man should enter into a sub relationship with a woman.


Well why don't you take a shot at it?

Should a man enter a submissive relationship with a woman who is capable of leading him?


----------



## Faithful Wife

CM: No. Not if it is clearly a "female authority male submission" relationship.

IMO.

Sexual submission is an entirely different thing. I know men who can't wait to have their wives tie them up and literally beat them into submission while verbally degrading them. Both partners are completely into it! They find it fun and sexy. She's a top and he is a bottom and they play this out anytime they want.

Then in the morning, she puts on her dress and he puts on his pants and they look like any normal couple, sharing chores, etc.

........

Now if you are just talking about a relationship where the woman mostly leads due to whatever factors are at play, and both the man and the woman are down for it, then sure, why not.

But not if you are talking about "authority".


----------



## TCSRedhead

I really like the way you process things, Trenton.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> I really, really do love him and I want him to know it. So, yeah, I'm going to work on building him up half as much as he has done for me. I'll probably have to do a lot of humble work and give up a lot of control and take a leap and recognize he deserved my trust all along.
> 
> Whatever, sorry, I'm feeling emotional.


^^^^Good.


----------



## Deejo

drerio said:


> sticking to the title of the thread:
> 
> 1. I know Laird Hamilton (the "weatherman") personally (I grew up on Kauai and surfed with him)... I think Gabby Reece (who I don't know) should be awarded a medal for sticking with this guy.
> 
> 2. I just downloaded the book... into the third chapter. I think some of you may be surprised by what you read. I am reserving any comment to the end.
> 
> So far from what I have read and know about the "weatherman", that single comment may actually be blown way out of proportion given that there is so much other stuff in the book.
> 
> 
> ETA: it really is a book about a decision she made to make her married life work on so many levels. And, yet this one statement is all anyone wants to discuss. Read the book.


Figured I'd be a bit of a hypocrite if I didn't buy the book. Don't expect that most of the folks here will. 

Interesting comment you made about Laird. His wife certainly alludes to him being extraordinarily focused and extraordinarily moody, which apparently fueled their near downfall in 2000. Neither trait surprises me in the case of a top, competitive athlete. I never presumed that Gabrielle was a 6 foot, 3 inch, wall-flower.

The book is a really fun read. And of course as you outlined, has very, very, little to do specifically with the topic that has garnered so much attention here.


----------



## TCSRedhead

I agree - not trying to hijack the thread although this subject has certainly been repeated a lot lately.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Deejo

Caribbean Man said:


> And would you suggest that a man should enter in a submissive relationship with a woman who makes more money than him , is better educated than him, and is better suited to lead than him?


Interestingly, all of which applied in Gabrielle's case. And she still chose the surfer dude. She has consistently been more famous, and made lots more money than the Weatherman.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife;1623540
Now if you are just talking about a relationship where the woman mostly leads due to whatever factors are at play said:


> So , can this ^^^^exact model work if the sexes are reversed?
> Where a man mostly leads due to whatever factors are at play, and both man and woman are down for it?


----------



## Catherine602

Caribbean Man said:


> And would you suggest that a man should enter in a submissive relationship with a woman who makes more money than him , is better educated than him, and is better suited to lead than him?


I have a son too and the answer is no. 

I think a man should never get into the position of being led by a woman. An attractive man has plans and goals that he is working towards. 

It does not matter who is making more money. I know a couple, both professionals. He opted to teach and makes a good salary by any standards. His wife is in private practice and she makes almost twice as much. 

He is definitely the dominant one in the relationship. It was not the money, it was their teamwork and his planning and execution. 

He helped her set up the bisiness and staid on top of the finances like a super office manager. Neither of them knew anything about the business.

It turned out that he was a better manager so he learned and fulfilled that function. She could have handeled it herself but they were a good team, so she did not have to go outside of the relationship. 

My husband is better at planning and executing and he likes being in charge. But it is not hard charging. We both know the finances, I do that but he knows what I am doing. 

We purchased a car - I went with his choice because he knows cars. 

We moved recently for his career. The place we live was what I wanted and he agreed because it made me happy and he wanted that because I made the move for him. 

Those are examples. We are a team but I feel better if he knows what he is doing. He doesnt tell me what to do and I feel repected. 

I am forgetful but he does not make me feel that being female has anything to do with it. Maybe he thinks that but he is too smart to let me know. We work things out together. The person who needs to be satisfied the most, gets to chose, if we don't agree on the same things.


----------



## Faithful Wife

CM: Yes....which I have already said to Red several times, in respecting her choices and her marriage.

CM, why do you think that I have a bias? I really don't. You just think that I do.

I do not think women are superior to men.

I realize many men think that all women think that....I do not.


----------



## Deejo

Won't ever get tired of reading stuff like that. Just feels good.



Trenton said:


> At first I had a clever response to you but in writing it I found I included the idea that my husband is a huge part of the reason why I am the strong woman I am today because he always had faith in me.
> 
> Then it clicked.
> 
> So I went to him and talked and apologized and admitted that although he has always supported and believed in me, for all my overbearing and intensity and even good intentions, I forgot to return the favor.
> 
> For sure, I have things to work on. I'm going to.
> 
> In the meantime, what I want is for both of us to feel great about our relationship and the time we have together. Life is too short and he deserves me to have half as much faith in him as he places in me. He's absolutely worthy of it. I intend to do that.
> 
> I was offered a job today, doing what I love. I've also been offered a job doing what I don't love but for more money. So we talked about that too. I was trying to plead my case. He said, "You should do what you don't love and make some money for the family."
> 
> I sat there sort of like...is he serious? He must be joking.
> 
> Then he cracked a smile and hugged me. He told me he knows the decision I'm going to make and that's a big part of why he admires me. Yeah, I cried.
> 
> I really, really do love him and I want him to know it. So, yeah, I'm going to work on building him up half as much as he has done for me. I'll probably have to do a lot of humble work and give up a lot of control and take a leap and recognize he deserved my trust all along.
> 
> Whatever, sorry, I'm feeling emotional.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Deejo said:


> Interestingly, all of which applied in Gabrielle's case. And she still chose the surfer dude. She has consistently been more famous, and made lots more money than the Weatherman.


i think a lot of it oils down to compatibility.
at some point in or relationships we need to say F everybody, this is what I'm doing , because it makes me happy.

clearly, this surfer guy rocks her world and they are happy together. it works for them , she's advising other women to give it a try.
i wonder if her method guaranteed happiness in a marriage, how many would be willing to try it?
But i guess that depends on what they consider happiness to be.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> CM: Yes....which I have already said to Red several times, in respecting her choices and her marriage.
> 
> CM, why do you think that I have a bias? I really don't. You just think that I do.
> 
> I do not think women are superior to men.
> 
> I realize many men think that all women think that....I do not.


I never said you have a bias, I just reversed the question.

It's called informal logic , trying to identify premises , identifying reasoning and coming to sound conclusions.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Catherine602 said:


> I have a son too and the answer is no.
> 
> I think a man should never get into the position of being led by a woman. An attractive man has plans and goals that he is working towards.
> 
> It does not matter who is making more money. I know a couple, both professionals. He opted to teach and makes a good salary by any standards. His wife is in private practice and she makes almost twice as much.
> 
> He is definitely the dominant one in the relationship. It was not the money, it was their teamwork and his planning and execution.
> 
> He helped her set up the bisiness and staid on top of the finances like a super office manager. Neither of them knew anything about the business.
> 
> It turned out that he was a better manager so he learned and fulfilled that function. She could have handeled it herself but they were a good team, so she did not have to go outside of the relationship.
> 
> My husband is better at planning and executing and he likes being in charge. But it is not hard charging. We both know the finances, I do that but he knows what I am doing.
> 
> We purchased a car - I went with his choice because he knows cars.
> 
> We moved recently for his career. The place we live was what I wanted and he agreed because it made me happy and he wanted that because I made the move for him.
> 
> Those are examples. We are a team but I feel better if he knows what he is doing. He doesnt tell me what to do and I feel repected.
> 
> I am forgetful but he does not make me feel that being female has anything to do with it. Maybe he thinks that but he is too smart to let me know. We work things out together. The person who needs to be satisfied the most, gets to chose, if we don't agree on the same things.


So then can we say that the best rule is that people should only get married to people whom they are compatible with , and it should be up to each couple to properly manage the power differentials in the relationship , to the best interest of each other?


----------



## Ikaika

Excerpt from Chapter 2

"Note to Dudes

At the risk of contradicting myself, I do have some specific counsel for any guy dealing with a new mom. I know they probably don't want my advice, but I won't let that stop me. 

The minute your chick has a baby, treat her like she's your new girlfriend. 

I mean literally. The woman has just had her whole life turned upside down, not to mention she feels like she's been turned inside out, then back again.

She feels like the moment she stands up all her internal organs are going to drop straight out of her. 

Don't walk in the room and treat her like the little mother, by which I mean with that deadly sense of reverence and timidity we usually reserve for people who have, against all odds, survived a tornado. Even though this is what she is.

Treat her like your chick.

Go over and stroke her hair. Give her a kiss. Ask her if you can get her something to drink. Offer to take the baby so she can shower and change into something that is not her spit-up-stained sweatshirt. 

The degree to which we appreciate these gestures cannot be underestimated."

And again, we say you go Gabby... there is way more to this book than that line of submission. Read the book.


----------



## Faithful Wife

CM "I never said you have a bias, I just reversed the question.

It's called informal logic , trying to identify premises , identifying reasoning and coming to sound conclusions."

Ok, what did you learn about me?


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> CM "I never said you have a bias, I just reversed the question.
> 
> It's called informal logic , trying to identify premises , identifying reasoning and coming to sound conclusions."
> 
> Ok, what did you learn about me?


Do you mean to ask what I got from your line of reasoning?

If yes,

Then what I got is that we both agree on the premise that Catherine's rule can apply both ways , but its up to the couple involved to work out their own power dynamics


----------



## Caribbean Man

coffee4me said:


> :iagree:
> 
> CM, I'm just chuckling. I view this as her trusting to your experience and judgement not being submissive to you. Your marriage to me as well sounds like a great partnership.


You make an interesting point.
But I wish the dynamics in a marriage were that simple.

Like I said before, she's very afraid of risk and debt.
I, am not afraid,and I have a very good relationship with our bankers and other financial agencies.

Last year I wanted to purchase a luxury vehicle. She was adamant , NO.
She gave her usual reasons.
But deep in the back of my head, I knew that this time, she was right. Too much unnecessary debt.
Left up to me I would purchase it , I am not afraid of debt.
But I submitted to her demands.

In that case , she's talking from her feelings about debt, which were the same feelings she had about the property I wanted to invest in.
She was dead wrong that time and I willingly submitted to her reservations.
What's the difference between that time and last year with the luxury vehicle?
See?
That's why its called submission. Its not always based on sound logic, and shared consensus.
Sometimes its based on intuition.
In my experience, women are usually intact with their intuition sometimes even more than men.
Men tend to rely on hard facts , women trust their gut instinct.
My wife is like that. But sometimes she's wrong, and sometimes she is dead on the money.

Whereas I hear the argument of joint policy etc, there are times that approach would not work and one party has to submit to the other.
The trick is finding the correct balance with YOUR SPOUSE,being generous with reciprocity, and making it work for the betterment of your marriage ,
Just like Gabby did.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Catherine602 said:


> I would not advise women to enter a submissive relationship for many reasons.
> 
> * Men are no more perfect than women*. Some cannot be trusted to lead. In fact, for all the talk of men spreading seeds and needing new vj and having roaming genes, a woman would have to be addled-brained to *give up control over her life and that of her children to such a disloyal, unstable, selfish being. *:scratchhead:
> 
> What happens when the leader falters and cheats, leaves the dependent family to fend for themselves. This will happen to 50% or more of marriages.
> 
> What do these submissive women do when they are jetisoned? They and their kids have big problems. Read some of the threads from women who were submissive to husbands who decided to leave for something new.
> 
> It is never good to get into a position where your partner is too sure that you cannot leave. There are extraordinary people who would not abuse the position but most of us are ordinary.
> 
> When we are too sure of a partner, we have a tendency to take them for granted. There is no need to pay much attention because they are not going anywhere. No woman should get into that position..
> .


THIS!!

I am highly suspect of anyone who WANTS the position of leader. What are their motives? Why are they trying to gain the upper hand? What benefit does it bring them? Do they really feel superior or are they trying to prove superiority because they in fact feel inferior. I can understand the latter with much more grace than the former. 

Any man who wants to have any sort of position of leadership or dominance over a woman is not just a red flag of danger, he's a freaking scarlet letter. Run!!


----------



## Caribbean Man

drerio said:


> Excerpt from Chapter 2
> 
> "Note to Dudes
> 
> At the risk of contradicting myself, I do have some specific counsel for any guy dealing with a new mom. I know they probably don't want my advice, but I won't let that stop me.
> 
> The minute your chick has a baby, treat her like she's your new girlfriend.
> 
> I mean literally. The woman has just had her whole life turned upside down, not to mention she feels like she's been turned inside out, then back again.
> 
> She feels like the moment she stands up all her internal organs are going to drop straight out of her.
> 
> Don't walk in the room and treat her like the little mother, by which I mean with that deadly sense of reverence and timidity we usually reserve for people who have, against all odds, survived a tornado. Even though this is what she is.
> 
> Treat her like your chick.
> 
> Go over and stroke her hair. Give her a kiss. Ask her if you can get her something to drink. Offer to take the baby so she can shower and change into something that is not her spit-up-stained sweatshirt.
> 
> The degree to which we appreciate these gestures cannot be underestimated."
> 
> And again, we say you go Gabby... *there is way more to this book than that line of submission. Read the book.*


Interesting also how the word submission seems offensive to so many but nobody's talking about the part where she mentions reciprocity on the part of the husbands.

In other words, she's CLEARLY stating that the concept works BOTH ways. She's just giving a female / wife perspective. hence he "_note to dudes_ " in the chapter you quoted.
This is a basic concept in marriage, nothing polemical about what she's advocating.
I have never purchased any other book mentioned here, MMSL, NMNG and so on but,
I will purchase this book.


----------



## TiggyBlue

I personally think it's because submissive is mostly described as a feminine trait.


> “to truly be feminine means being soft, receptive, and –- look out, here it comes –- submissive.”


I realize that's one line out of a book and they pulled it to get people talking about it and she may feel feminine being submissive but that many won't (depends on someone's nature), 
they could of pulled a line saying something like 'partner's submitting to each other can improve a marriage' (if she wrote anything like that) but they didn't, the book wouldn't have got nearly as much talk about it or publicity if they did.


----------



## Caribbean Man

LadyOfTheLake said:


> THIS!!
> 
> *I am highly suspect of anyone who WANTS the position of leader.* *What are their motives? Why are they trying to gain the upper hand? What benefit does it bring them? Do they really feel superior or are they trying to prove superiority because they in fact feel inferior. I can understand the latter with much more grace than the former. *
> 
> Any man who wants to have any sort of position of leadership or dominance over a woman is not just a red flag of danger, he's a freaking scarlet letter. Run!!


Then by your reasoning you should suspicious and be running from yourself!

On this thread on page #06 , 04.15.2013 @ 1.11PM, Post # 81
You stated that;

"...._*Personally, I think women are much stronger than men, more suited to leadership roles and that the world would be a much more peaceful place were women to take control*_....."

Yes?

Or is it that maybe you just hate seeing men in leadership roles?

No?


----------



## Caribbean Man

TiggyBlue said:


> I personally think it's because submissive is mostly described as a feminine trait.
> 
> I realize that's one line out of a book and they pulled it to get people talking about it and she may feel feminine being submissive but that many won't (depends on someone's nature),
> they could of pulled a line saying something like 'partner's submitting to each other can improve a marriage' (if she wrote anything like that) but they didn't, the book wouldn't have got nearly as much talk about it or publicity if they did.


Well that's funny.
The part that jumped out at me is when she implied that submission should be proportionate to the husband's reciprocity.

Maybe its my confirmation bias?


----------



## Tall Average Guy

Trenton said:


> Whatever, sorry, I'm feeling emotional.


Absolutely nothing to be sorry about. I am glad that this exchange was helpful. 

Remember that improvement (both for self and for a relationship) is a journey, not a destination.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Caribbean Man said:


> Then by your reasoning you should suspicious and be running from yourself!
> 
> On this thread on page #06 , 04.15.2013 @ 1.11PM, Post # 81
> You stated that;
> 
> "...._*Personally, I think women are much stronger than men, more suited to leadership roles and that the world would be a much more peaceful place were women to take control*_....."
> 
> Yes?
> 
> Or is it that maybe you just hate seeing men in leadership roles?
> 
> No?


I have no reason to be suspicious of myself, as I have no desire to be my husband's leader. He is perfectly capable of making his own decisions. He doesn't require my input. On issues that affect both of us, we both make the decision. I refuse to submit, I refuse to lead. 

Isn't there that poem, "Do not walk behind me for I shall not lead, do not walk ahead of me for I shall not follow, but walk beside me and be my friend" Now THAT describes an ideal marriage. 

I feel that women are better suited to leadership roles, in general, since historically men have made such a muck up of it. Women are capable of seeing the bigger picture, of caring for the needs of the group at large rather than simply remaining the dominant one. Women will sacrifice and suffer for others. Men make others sacrifice and suffer, IMO. I'd be far more trusting of a female leader than a male. But I still don't want one LOL.


----------



## Caribbean Man

LadyOfTheLake said:


> *He is perfectly capable of making his own decisions. He doesn't require my input.*


Let me ask you this.
If you say that your husband doesn't need your input into his decisions,
Then why are you two married?


I ALWAYS seek my wife's input , even when I dress before I leave the house.
If she tells me "..._ Hun , you look good_.." I leave home literally floating on cloud 9.
If she tells me she doesn't like that shirt,sometimes I go back and change it.
I live for her input.
Like I have said ad nauseam in this thread, many times I have submitted to her wishes even when I knew she was wrong.
But I_ need_ her input.

So how does that work for you guys.....
That you don't need each other's input?


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Caribbean Man said:


> Let me ask you this.
> If you say that your husband doesn't need your input into his decisions,
> Then why are you two married?
> 
> 
> I ALWAYS seek my wife's input , even when I dress before I leave the house.
> If she tells me "..._ Hun , you look good_.." I leave home literally floating on cloud 9.
> If she tells me she doesn't like that shirt,sometimes I go back and change it.
> I live for her input.
> Like I have said ad nauseam in this thread, many times I have submitted to her wishes even though I knew she was wrong.
> But I_ need_ her input.
> 
> So how does that work for you guys.....
> That you don't need each other's input?


I married him *because* he doesn't need me. I despise needy people. I don't WANT to have to give my opinion on what he wears or what he does when it doesn't affect me. Just as I don't require any input from him on my affairs when they don't affect him. Sure we swap ideas and talk, but neither of us needs that, its just for the sake of conversation. He isn't interested in my daily doings and has little say in them, beyond the superficial. Same with him. I don't really know what he does during the day and it doesn't really matter to me because it doesn't affect me. We chat during the day via text but I don't interfere with what he does and vice versa. Like, I don't ask if I can go shopping with my friends. I say I am going and do you want anything? I don't ask if I can attend this or that function, I say I am going and I'll be back at such and such a time. Same with him. He doesn't ask permission or my opinion and I'd be upset if he did.


----------



## Tall Average Guy

LadyOfTheLake said:


> I married him *because* he doesn't need me. I despise needy people. I don't WANT to have to give my opinion on what he wears or what he does when it doesn't affect me. Just as I don't require any input from him on my affairs when they don't affect him. Sure we swap ideas and talk, but neither of us needs that, its just for the sake of conversation. He isn't interested in my daily doings and has little say in them, beyond the superficial. Same with him. I don't really know what he does during the day and it doesn't really matter to me because it doesn't affect me. We chat during the day via text but I don't interfere with what he does and vice versa. Like, I don't ask if I can go shopping with my friends. I say I am going and do you want anything? I don't ask if I can attend this or that function, I say I am going and I'll be back at such and such a time. Same with him. He doesn't ask permission or my opinion and I'd be upset if he did.


It seems like roommates who have sex to me. But I am glad that you find happiness in it.


----------



## Caribbean Man

LadyOfTheLake said:


> I married him *because* he doesn't need me. I despise needy people. I don't WANT to have to give my opinion on what he wears or what he does when it doesn't affect me. Just as I don't require any input from him on my affairs when they don't affect him. Sure we swap ideas and talk, but neither of us needs that, its just for the sake of conversation. He isn't interested in my daily doings and has little say in them, beyond the superficial. Same with him. I don't really know what he does during the day and it doesn't really matter to me because it doesn't affect me. We chat during the day via text but I don't interfere with what he does and vice versa. Like, I don't ask if I can go shopping with my friends. I say I am going and do you want anything? I don't ask if I can attend this or that function, I say I am going and I'll be back at such and such a time. Same with him. He doesn't ask permission or my opinion and I'd be upset if he did.


Quite^^^Interesting!


However,
I * NEED * my wife by my side, she NEEDS me too.
We need and place high value on each other's input.,
That's why I married her,
And she married me....


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Tall Average Guy said:


> It seems like roommates who have sex to me. But I am glad that you find happiness in it.


I call it liberated and enlightened


----------



## Caribbean Man

LadyOfTheLake said:


> I call it liberated and enlightened


Ohhhh,
Ok, ok, ok


----------



## ScarletBegonias

LadyOfTheLake said:


> I call it liberated and enlightened


would that mean marriages unlike the one you describe would be unenlightened and lacking liberation? 

:scratchhead:


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

ScarletBegonias said:


> would that mean marriages unlike the one you describe would be unenlightened and lacking liberation?
> 
> :scratchhead:


I think marriages like the Submitted wife ones are definitely unenlightened and lacking in liberation. Most certainly. Other combinations of domination and submission work well for other people and that is perfect for those relationships. It is just when women are expected to obey and submit that I feel a time warp has occurred.


----------



## Caribbean Man

coffee4me said:


> *To truly be masculine, means being strong, receptive and -- look out here it comes-- submissive.*
> 
> Let's just add this CM since it goes both ways.


Thank you Coffee!
Yes , yes and again,
Yes!


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Caribbean Man said:


> My concern were that there was a report in the news that there had been *a number of rapes on the island.*
> IMO*, I thought that two of them going alone put them at high risk.*
> If a number of them went, then there is more safety in numbers.


See my husband would SURELY put his foot down here...and I would appreciate that he IS so safety conscious.... actually I am a safety nut myself..... another thing we have in common... even when I plan trips, I look into the crime of the area, I want no part of that part of town... 

He's told me -he can't even sleep....if I am out with my friends at night...until I get home...he usually conks out early too... I think it's sweet. If I took a trip away from him (I have no desire to do this- but have had opportunities)....he'd want me to have FUN (he'd allow it)....he'd miss me ...but above all...is the..... "will she be safe?" in the back of his mind...the trip getting there/ what type of atmosphere I will be in...what could happen. 

... Unless my husband knows someone, he doesn't trust anyone....or their intentions... there are many shady corrupt people in this world...He is ever mindful of this....this is where his heart is at ....and ya know...that's a  thing.... I would NEVER change this in him.



Catherine602 said:


> I would not advise women to enter a submissive relationship for many reasons.
> 
> Men are no more perfect than women. *Some cannot be trusted to lead. *In fact, for all the talk of men spreading seeds and needing new vj and having roaming genes, a woman would have to be addled-brained to give up control over her life and that of her children to such a disloyal, unstable, selfish being. :scratchhead:
> 
> What happens when the leader falters and cheats, leaves the dependent family to fend for themselves. This will happen to 50% or more of marriages.
> 
> What do these submissive women do when they are jetisoned? They and their kids have big problems. Read some of the threads from women who were submissive to husbands who decided to leave for something new.
> 
> It is never good to get into a position where your partner is too sure that you cannot leave.* There are extraordinary people who would not abuse the position but most of us are ordinary*.
> 
> When we are too sure of a partner, we have a tendency to take them for granted. There is no need to pay much attention because they are not going anywhere. No woman should get into that position.


 I consider my husband one of those extraordinary men... he never took advantage of me..not for a day.. but I took advantage of him ~ go figure.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

LadyOfTheLake said:


> It is just when women are expected to obey and submit that I feel a time warp has occurred.


I'm not keen on that either,in that aspect we are definitely on the same page.

:smthumbup:


----------



## Caribbean Man

SimplyAmorous said:


> See my husband would SURELY put his foot down here...and I would appreciate that he IS so safety conscious.... actually I am a safety nut myself..... another thing we have in common... even when I plan trips, I look into the crime of the area, I want no part of that part of town...
> 
> He's told me -he can't even sleep....if I am out with my friends at night...until I get home...he usually conks out early too... I think it's sweet. If I took a trip away from him (I have no desire to do this- but have had opportunities)....he'd want me to have FUN (he'd allow it)....he'd miss me ...but above all...is the..... "will she be safe?" in the back of his mind...the trip getting there/ what type of atmosphere I will be in...what could happen.
> 
> ... Unless my husband knows someone, he doesn't trust anyone....or their intentions... there are many shady corrupt people in this world...He is ever mindful of this....this is where his heart is at ....


When my wife is out at night , same with me.
I usually stay up listening to music until she returns. She usually calls me before she leaves the venue.
When I'm out, same thing. Its the way we live with each other.

Men are supposed to protect women from other men who want to do them harm.
Women are physically weaker than men.
So if a man is very protective of his wife, mother and daughters,from other men ,how is that bad?


----------



## ScarletBegonias

Caribbean Man said:


> Men are supposed to protect women from other men who want to do them harm.
> Women are physically weaker than men.
> So if a man is very protective of his wife, mother and daughters,from other men ,how is that bad?


:rofl::rofl: 

sorry,I was just picturing my SO trying to protect me :rofl::rofl: oops there I go again

In all seriousness,I love the guy and respect him greatly but I'd have a better chance protecting myself or relying on my dogs to protect me.

Emotionally,I'm his protector.
Physically,I'd have to resort to stabbing guys with my spike heels or hitting them with my taser.I've been in many fights over the years,SO has been in zero.He'd rather talk it out or walk away.

My babe is a lover,not a fighter.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Caribbean Man said:


> When my wife is out at night , same with me.
> I usually stay up listening to music until she returns. She usually calls me before she leaves the venue.
> When I'm out, same thing. Its the way we live with each other.
> 
> Men are supposed to protect women from other men who want to do them harm.
> Women are physically weaker than men.
> So if a man is very protective of his wife, mother and daughters,from other men ,how is that bad?


*headdesk*

Because women are not helpless infants that NEED protection. 

And a woman's definition of protection and a man's are likely to be very different. If some 6' 250 man was attacking me, I'm not going to tell my hubs that he can't step in and lay the guy out. But, if he thinks he can tell me where I can and can't go or who I can and can't see in the name of "protecting" me, because something bad might happen.....he's got another thing coming. Only *I* get to make those decisions, I and I will face the consequences. It's called personal responsibility and nowhere on my marriage license did I check a box signing that away.


----------



## Tall Average Guy

LadyOfTheLake said:


> I call it liberated and enlightened


Yep, roommates who have sex. Neither answers to the other until one decides the other's decision "effects" them. You are both liberated to do anything you want and enlightened enough not to care about what your spouse does, until you decide that you do. 

Again, if it works for you fine. Different strokes for different folks and all. But it sounds pretty empty to me.


----------



## Tall Average Guy

LadyOfTheLake said:


> But, if he thinks he can tell me where I can and can't go or who I can and can't see in the name of "protecting" me, because something bad might happen.....he's got another thing coming. Only *I* get to make those decisions, I and I will face the consequences. It's called personal responsibility and nowhere on my marriage license did I check a box signing that away.


Are there any limits to this? Is there any behavior of yours that he gets input in?


----------



## tacoma

The more I read about your marriage Lady the more it strikes me that you don't want a husband but need a room mate.

I'd love to hear your husbands perspective
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ScarletBegonias

tacoma said:


> The more I read about your marriage Lady the more it strikes me that you don't want a husband but need a room mate.
> 
> I'd love to hear your husbands perspective
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I can't knock her if she's happy,that would be really rude. I am definitely curious and fascinated by the dynamic she describes.

I would love to see a joint thread between LOTL and her husband.


----------



## Caribbean Man

tacoma said:


> *The more I read about your marriage Lady the more it strikes me that you don't want a husband but need a room mate.*


:iagree:
"..._Turning and turning in a widening gyre, 
The falcon cannot hear the falconer...
Things fall apart, the centre cannot hold,
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world_..."

" The Second Coming." William.B.Yeates.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Caribbean Man said:


> When my wife is out at night , same with me.
> I usually stay up listening to music until she returns. She usually calls me before she leaves the venue.
> When I'm out, same thing. Its the way we live with each other.


 Awe....I wouldn't automatically think this of you...but I like that.:smthumbup: I often do the calling too, I always say I plan to be home by such & such a time & if anything deviates from that.... I CALL. He does the same. 



> Men are supposed to protect women from other men who want to do them harm.
> Women are physically weaker than men.
> So if a man is very protective of his wife, mother and daughters, from other men ,how is that bad?


I just have a bigger MOUTH than my husband (Mrs Assertive)... but he is surely much stronger than me. 



> *ScarletBegonias says* : In all seriousness,I love the guy and respect him greatly but I'd have a better chance protecting myself or relying on my dogs to protect me.
> 
> Emotionally,I'm his protector.
> 
> Physically,I'd have to resort to stabbing guys with my spike heels or hitting them with my taser.I've been in many fights over the years,SO has been in zero.He'd rather talk it out or walk away.
> 
> My babe is a lover,not a fighter


 Mine has said this to me before to...that he is "a Lover , not a fighter"... what can we do !

But I know he'd have a rush of adrenaline & go Psycho on someone if one of us was being hurt..or ready to pounce if in danger....He can hardly see a Rape scene on TV... he gets pi$$ed off....It's weird. 

He'd protect us with his life, this I know...if anything is the least bit dangerous, he goes before me...tells me to stay back.


----------



## TCSRedhead

And so Lady becomes the first person I’ve hit the ignore button for on TAM. It’s one thing to say that you disagree with someone else’s marriage or beliefs, etc. It’s quite another to insult me and shows a great deal of ignorance and intolerance. This coming from a woman who admittedly will not cuddle/hug her own children, bragged about bloodying her husband during a play scuffle (she intended to harm him, it wasn’t accidental) and intentionally shut down the sex life in her marriage for many years. Yup – that’s enlightened and liberated. Sure.

I’ve answered your questions truthfully and without candor in the interest of sharing a different point of view in the spirit of learning which is the foundation of TAM. 

I wish you luck Lady and I use the term Lady very sarcastically there. Report me and ban me if you like.


----------



## Caribbean Man

SimplyAmorous said:


> *He'd protect us with his life, this I know...if anything is the least bit dangerous, he goes before me...tells me to stay back*.


This^^ right there is me.
And I would NEVER let my wife near a pitbull!
She is terribly afraid of big dogs....

Haha.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Tall AverageGuy said:


> Are there any limits to this? Is there any behavior of yours that he gets input in?


No, not really. Why should he? Furthermore, I don't do things that I think he wouldn't like. I know he doesn't like it when I spend time alone with other men, so whenever it is practical I avoid such situations, even though *I* don't have an issue with it. I love him and don't want him to feel uncomfortable, if it can be helped. Like I said before though, he is awesome in that he doesn't NEED anything from me. We just ARE and that works. I can't repect a man who needs anything from anyone because that is a weakness and I despise weakness in people. I'm afraid I would destroy a weak man. 

But we aren't "roommates" Tacoma. We are quite affectionate and playful with one another. We share a mutual adoration. I would do almost anything for this man. But I won't lose myself in him. Never. And I love him because he would never want me to.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Caribbean Man

LadyOfTheLake said:


> No, not really. Why should he? Furthermore, *I don't do things that I think he wouldn't like.*


Lady, I'm trying to get a better insight into what you're proposing as enlightened and liberated.
This is the first time I'm reading of this type of marital arrangement.
Even in the open marriages I know, the couples tend to very open with each other.
So please, bear with me.

Here's my question;

How would you know if you're doing something he doesn't like if he's not allowed an input into your activities?

And suppose those things *you think* he's ok with he's not, because they are just *your thoughts* that has absolutely nothing to do with his real feelings on it?

Or is it that he just doesn't bother?


----------



## TCSRedhead

I'm just curious - when we were married, my part of the vows contained not only the promise to love and honor but also to obey. I never objected to this. 

During the ceremony, the pastor spoke of the husband leading the wife, the wife submitting to the husband. He described this in such a beautiful manner He also cautioned husbands to look to themselves for the reason why their wives may be unhappy. It was up to the husband to be the type of man who earned the level of trust, loyalty and submission of their wives. 

I cannot say our marriage has been perfect. Anyone who's followed some of my story on CWI can attest to that. I stopped putting my husband first, followed a very selfish path and nearly destroyed my marriage in disrespect and by not being the loving, submissive wife that he deserved. In return, he lovingly forgave me in entirety and continues to treat me as adoringly as ever not holding it over my head or using it against me.

Did anyone here take the word 'obey' out of their vows?


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

LOL, he can make his thoughts known without directly saying much. Plus, we've been together a lot of years. I know his thoughts and feelings regarding most issues. For example, if I say I am going fishing with a couple of guys and will be gone all day, he will casually ask if any other women will be there. If not, I make sure to point out that we will be in a public area, lots of people around, often with a photographer as well. What he really doesn't like is me in a boat alone one on one with a man because it may look bad, so I ask for a wife to accompany, if its possible. So far it has been. But he NEVER makes any demands either way. Final call is up to me, since it is my decision. 
His workout buddy is a younger woman. They hang out from time to time. I'm not crazy about it...more because she is troubled and attracts drama like a magnet than anything else. But he likes to play big brother to her so I don't really have any say in the matter. THAT iis liberation. He is free to make his own choices, as am I. But we both do so with the other in mind.


And I know I'm on ignore, ROFLMAO, but you better believe OBEY was NOT in my vows. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## TiggyBlue

TCSRedhead said:


> Did anyone here take the word 'obey' out of their vows?


We did


----------



## ScarletBegonias

TCSRedhead said:


> Did anyone here take the word 'obey' out of their vows?


My ex and I wrote our own vows.Obey wasn't on the list.

If I ever get married again, obey won't be in those vows either.


----------



## Caribbean Man

I am beginning to feel as if I'm in the twilight zone here....

I too remember the pastor, at our wedding, telling my wife that this man, referring to me , ".. belong to you.."

I remember him telling me that this woman, referring to her, now belong to you.


I can't even remember the word " liberated " being part of anything that was said, nor have I ever seen it on the marriage certificate we both signed...:scratchhead:
I can't imagine how it would fit in..


----------



## ScarletBegonias

Caribbean Man said:


> I am beginning to feel as if I'm in the twilight zone here....
> 
> I too remember the pastor, at our wedding, telling my wife that this man, referring to me , ".. belong to you.."
> 
> I remember him telling me that this woman, referring to her, now belong to you.
> 
> 
> I can't even remember the word " liberated " being part of anything that was said, nor have I ever seen it on the marriage certificate we both signed...:scratchhead:
> I can't imagine how it would fit in..


I'm nearly positive the times I'd apply the word liberated or use liberation in my relationship is when I finally learned to trust a man enough to allow him to give me an orgasm  

talk about feeling liberated,oh the freedom of letting go and not worrying!

that,and the liberated feeling of not being with a man who had to control all aspects of our lives and how we lived.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

I barely remember my wedding, I don't remember a single word of the vows. But I KNOW I didn't allow that word in there. It couldn't have slipped past me and I would have choked before I said it 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## SimplyAmorous

TCSRedhead said:


> This coming from a woman who admittedly will not cuddle/hug her own children, bragged about bloodying her husband during a play scuffle (she intended to harm him, it wasn’t accidental) and intentionally shut down the sex life in her marriage for many years. Yup – that’s enlightened and liberated. Sure.




What I get from every post is this >>> She has no NEED of anyone... Me personally, I feel it's one of the things missing in many many marriages today...because we DON'T need one another anymore... we are all so damn independent & so proud, we wave our glorious flags.. ... so why marry at all? Really [email protected]#$% And many are choosing not to....lovely for our children. 

I've never used the ignore button, I guess I enjoy sitting here with my mouth hanging open... keeps things entertaining anyway. She is one who stands out by far..she could not be further on a scale from where I am- on the other side of an axis somewhere...



Caribbean Man said:


> This^^ right there is me.
> And I would NEVER let my wife near a* pitbull*!
> She is terribly afraid of big dogs....


 It's a FAMILY rule written in stone with us...if a friend has a PIT BULL, you do NOT go to their house. Period. 

I have no regard or trust for those animals...any parent who has one , in my view is playing with FIRE..I would even see them as irresponsible....

I've made our kids watch programs on what one of those seemingly innocent beasts can do -in a moment- after being cuddly house pets for years....Some *risks* you just do NOT venture.
You are a smart man CB 



> *LadyOftheLake said*: *I can't repect a man who needs anything from anyone because that is a weakness and I despise weakness in people.* I'm afraid I would destroy a weak man.


 What you are saying here is Vulnerability is weakness also... I couldn't disagree with you more so... 

Not that would you care for another perspective that could enlighten....*but I dare you *to take 20 minutes of your time and watch this video -1st line in this thread....


----------



## ScarletBegonias

SimplyAmorous said:


> It's a FAMILY rule written in stone with us...if a friend has a PIT BULL, you do NOT go to their house. Period.
> 
> I have no regard or trust for those animals...any parent who has one , in my view is playing with FIRE..I would even see them as irresponsible....
> 
> I've made our kids watch programs on what one of those seemingly innocent beasts can do -in a moment- after being cuddly house pets for years....Some *risks* you just do NOT venture.
> You are a smart man CB



Can we all just stop with the anti pit posts please? If for no other reason than bc you kinda sorta like me and maybe respect me and what I do with my time, rescuing and rehabilitating pits.


----------



## Tall Average Guy

LadyOfTheLake said:


> No, not really. Why should he? Furthermore, I don't do things that I think he wouldn't like. I know he doesn't like it when I spend time alone with other men, so whenever it is practical I avoid such situations, even though *I* don't have an issue with it. I love him and don't want him to feel uncomfortable, if it can be helped. Like I said before though, he is awesome in that he doesn't NEED anything from me. We just ARE and that works. I can't repect a man who needs anything from anyone because that is a weakness and I despise weakness in people. I'm afraid I would destroy a weak man.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Why do you care if he does not like it? It does not affect him, so why should he get a say? If you decide to spend the night with a guy at a hotel in a purely platonic manner (say because it is late and you don't want to drive drunk), why does your husband get a say? If he is uncomfortable with that, isn't that merely jealousy, and thus a weakness, on his part?

I am trying to understand the thought process that says I can do what ever I want and my partner only matters as much as I want him/or her to matter. It seems like you have no responsibility to him at all.


----------



## TiggyBlue

ScarletBegonias said:


> Can we all just stop with the anti pit posts please? If for no other reason than bc you kinda sorta like me and maybe respect me and what I do with my time, rescuing and rehabilitating pits.


I would love to rescue a pit, unfortunately there a banned breed in England


----------



## TCSRedhead

I would agree, SB, that having someone control every aspect of my life would definitely not work for me either. 

I wasn't sure how I'd feel about that as part of our vows but I did say it trusting the man I married and am fortunate he's not the type to wave it all about and go on about it incessantly. 

Then again, he's the type to shake his head and snicker at the whole Alpha game thing too. In his view, some people are with certain personalities and traits.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

TCSRedhead said:


> I would agree, SB, that having someone control every aspect of my life would definitely not work for me either.
> 
> I wasn't sure how I'd feel about that as part of our vows but I did say it trusting the man I married and am fortunate he's not the type to wave it all about and go on about it incessantly.
> 
> Then again, he's the type to shake his head and snicker at the whole Alpha game thing too. In his view, some people are with certain personalities and traits.


That's a man who is a keeper:smthumbup:


----------



## SimplyAmorous

ScarletBegonias said:


> Can we all just stop with the anti pit posts please? If for no other reason than bc you kinda sorta like me and maybe respect me and what I do with my time, rescuing and rehabilitating pits.


You don't have kids anyway... And No, I had no idea you did this as a hobby....news to me....

I have a GF who has one, I don't venture the conversation with her...but I won't allow my daughter to stay at her house.....To me, it's about safety. We all have our boundaries as the enforcers of our family. 

We'll agree to disagree on this issue..and I'll keep my mouth shut now.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

SimplyAmorous said:


> You don't have kids anyway... And No, I had no idea you did this as a hobby....news to me....
> 
> I have a GF who has one, I don't venture the conversation with her...but I won't allow my daughter to stay at her house.....To me, it's about safety. We all have our boundaries as the enforcers of our family.
> 
> We'll agree to disagree on this issue..and I'll keep my mouth shut now.


I have a 10 year old son.

Yes,we'll agree to disagree and we'll stay on topic which last I checked,has zero to do with pits.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Tall Average Guy said:


> Why do you care if he does not like it? It does not affect him, so why should he get a say? If you decide to spend the night with a guy at a hotel in a purely platonic manner (say because it is late and you don't want to drive drunk), why does your husband get a say? If he is uncomfortable with that, isn't that merely jealousy, and thus a weakness, on his part?
> 
> I am trying to understand the thought process that says I can do what ever I want and my partner only matters as much as I want him/or her to matter. It seems like you have no responsibility to him at all.


I don't WANT him to be unhappy. I try to be accomodating, up to a point. I understand the male ego and how he wouldn't want me sleeping near another male. We had this issue arise last month. I was away on an overnight fishing trip and was offered a place to crash at a guy friends place. It would have been cheaper and easier to stay there and get an early start. But dh was obviously uncomfortable with it. In fact, it made him angry that I even suggested it. I weighed the pros and cons for awhile and when dh asked what I was going to do I told him I'd grab a hotel for the night. That made him feel better. I want him to be happy, so I was happy too. In my mind, the male ego is a crippling thing and concessions must be made from time to time. I don't always give in like that, but in that case I did want him to be happy with my decision. 

As for your latter statement...I don't understand? Of course my partner only matters as much as I say he matters. That is the way it is with everyone. No one can make themselves matter MORE to someone else. You don't have that kind of control over people.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Caribbean Man

My goodness.......


----------



## TCSRedhead

Thanks for the folks who answered on the vows. I am probably the corner case who kept it - LOL!!!


----------



## Caribbean Man

TCSRedhead said:


> Thanks for the folks who answered on the vows. I am probably the corner case who kept it - LOL!!!


Nope,

We kept in our vow too.


----------



## Faithful Wife

We didn't have the word obey in ours....we were married in Hawaii by a Hawaiian dude who wrote an amazing speech about love and caring and each other, plus the world around us. The vow part was basically just "I vow to belong to you and keep you".


----------



## TCSRedhead

Faithful Wife said:


> We didn't have the word obey in ours....we were married in Hawaii by a Hawaiian dude who wrote an amazing speech about love and caring and each other, plus the world around us. The vow part was basically just "I vow to belong to you and keep you".


That's really beautiful - I like the sentiment. Looking back, I really wish that I had recorded our ceremony. The message by the pastor was really touching and I'd like to replay it on the days I'm feeling a bit discouraged.

We're renewing our vows this year and it will be interesting to see how those turn out. Waterproof mascara is my friend!!!


----------



## Faithful Wife

You don't have video of your ceremony! Oh no!!! That is a shame. 

We do have ours, and it isn't like we view it all the time, but I know we will at some point...I am technically still a newlywed....married 3 years (but together for 10).

The beautiful Hawaiian man blew a conch shell while we kissed....and everyone on the beach below could hear it and dozens of people started to clap and whistle when they realized what the conch meant. These were strangers, we had eloped and were there by ourselves. But these strangers were shouting "congratulations!" and "you both look beautiful!" and "good luck" to us from the beach.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> _Originally Posted by *TCSRedhead*_
> Thanks for the folks who answered on the vows. I am probably the corner case who kept it - LOL!!!


We were married in a church with the stained glasses windows...







... I smiled through every word of those Old Fashioned Vows.....trusted the man before me....to honor & cherish me ....

Over the years....some of the things he has apologized to me for....I have almost laughed at him -because they were so darn small...but yet makes me love him all the more... 

So "*the Obeying*" has always been for my own benefit...as I have learned .... though he's enjoyed the afterwards ....telling me with a  ..."I TOLD YOU SO"...


----------



## Deejo

LadyOfTheLake said:


> No, not really. Why should he? Furthermore, I don't do things that I think he wouldn't like. I know he doesn't like it when I spend time alone with other men, so whenever it is practical I avoid such situations, even though *I* don't have an issue with it. I love him and don't want him to feel uncomfortable, if it can be helped. Like I said before though, he is awesome in that he doesn't NEED anything from me. We just ARE and that works. I can't repect a man who needs anything from anyone because that is a weakness and I despise weakness in people. I'm afraid I would destroy a weak man.
> 
> But we aren't "roommates" Tacoma. We are quite affectionate and playful with one another. We share a mutual adoration. I would do almost anything for this man. But I won't lose myself in him. Never. And I love him because he would never want me to.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


So ... I feel pretty confident saying that most people, based upon the description of how you feel about your marriage, and you and your husband's conduct in it, would describe it as an odd outlier.

They don't get it. But you and he do, and you guys are groovy with it.

Same can easily be said of Gabby and Laird. Quite obviously, there are people here, and elsewhere that quite vociferously believe their model to be an odd outlier. But again, there they are, 17 years later, married and making it work.

I say it all the time. I'm interested in what works. I don't much care what it looks like. 

To be more specific ... I'm interested in what works for ME.

To reiterate, I actually bought and am reading the book. The 'submissive' thing as it stands in the book, isn't even a footnote of what we have been discussing here thus far.

It's a fun read. She writes like a guy ... in a very matter of fact, conversational style. 

She respects her husband. And it seems pretty apparent that regardless of whatever their dynamic looks like, he respects her too.

I accept that people cannot possibly get their head around this dynamic. That is all the clearer to me after reading LotL's description of her marriage and how she feels about it.

Because I can't remotely, get my head around that dynamic. Don't even see a need to comment on it because it is utterly antithetical to how I gauge and perceive relationships and marriage.

Trying to illustrate that although this is fun to drag out into the light and discuss, I don't expect that anyone is going to change their perspective on what constitutes a loving, healthy marriage.

And lets face it, half of the population comes no where near to that ideal in the first place.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> The beautiful Hawaiian man blew a conch shell while we kissed....and everyone on the beach below could hear it and dozens of people started to clap and whistle when they realized what the conch meant. These were strangers, *we had eloped* and were there by ourselves. But these strangers were shouting "congratulations!" and "you both look beautiful!" and "good luck" to us from the beach.


Sounds nice!
I smiled when I read the highlighted part^^^ above.

We couldn't have ours on the beach because my wife wanted to be married in the month of June [ " June Bride " ], and June is the height of the rainy season down here. In fact on our wedding day, it rained.

However I remember every , single detail.
I always remember what she said to me whilst we were in the back seat of the car , heading to the reception / party.

She told me that it was the happiest day of her life and that she had always dreamed of it.
And she was teary eyed.

These things, I will always remember!


----------



## TCSRedhead

FW and SA, both of your ceremonies sound so beautiful. 

We had a small ceremony in our pastor's house. Our two best friends were there as were my mom, dad and our daughters. It was ridiculously small but so personal and non-traditional.


----------



## Topical storm

TCSRedhead said:


> And so Lady becomes the first person I’ve hit the ignore button for on TAM. It’s one thing to say that you disagree with someone else’s marriage or beliefs, etc. It’s quite another to insult me and shows a great deal of ignorance and intolerance. This coming from a woman who admittedly will not cuddle/hug her own children, bragged about bloodying her husband during a play scuffle (she intended to harm him, it wasn’t accidental) and intentionally shut down the sex life in her marriage for many years. Yup – that’s enlightened and liberated. Sure.
> 
> I’ve answered your questions truthfully and without candor in the interest of sharing a different point of view in the spirit of learning which is the foundation of TAM.
> 
> I wish you luck Lady and I use the term Lady very sarcastically there. Report me and ban me if you like.


Wow. Fresh Red headed Ether delievered.


----------



## Topical storm

SimplyAmorous said:


> What I get from every post is this >>> She has no NEED of anyone... Me personally, I feel it's one of the things missing in many many marriages today...because we DON'T need one another anymore... we are all so damn independent & so proud, we wave our glorious flags.. ... so why marry at all? Really [email protected]#$% And many are choosing not to....lovely for our children.
> 
> I've never used the ignore button, I guess I enjoy sitting here with my mouth hanging open... keeps things entertaining anyway. She is one who stands out by far..she could not be further on a scale from where I am- on the other side of an axis somewhere...
> 
> It's a FAMILY rule written in stone with us...if a friend has a PIT BULL, you do NOT go to their house. Period.
> 
> I have no regard or trust for those animals...any parent who has one , in my view is playing with FIRE..I would even see them as irresponsible....
> 
> I've made our kids watch programs on what one of those seemingly innocent beasts can do -in a moment- after being cuddly house pets for years....Some *risks* you just do NOT venture.
> You are a smart man CB
> 
> What you are saying here is Vulnerability is weakness also... I couldn't disagree with you more so...
> 
> Not that would you care for another perspective that could enlighten....*but I dare you *to take 20 minutes of your time and watch this video -1st line in this thread....


Don Demarco. Get ya popcorn ready.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Wish there was a "WTF does that mean?" button.


----------



## Caribbean Man

coffee4me said:


> I had 200 people at my ceremony. After dating sooooooo long everybody in town had to see if it was actually gonna happen.



We initially invited just 75 people.
On the wedding day, the church was half empty, but the reception venue was packed with people.
LOL, I got worried about the food and drinks when I saw the crowd, but everything went as planned.

In our country weddings are always large.
Like in FaithfulWife's description of her wedding, even strangers nearby would take part in the celebration.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

SimplyAmorous said:


> What I get from every post is this >>> She has no NEED of anyone... Me personally, I feel it's one of the things missing in many many marriages today...because we DON'T need one another anymore... we are all so damn independent & so proud, we wave our glorious flags.. ... so why marry at all? Really [email protected]#$% And many are choosing not to....lovely for our children.
> 
> I've never used the ignore button, I guess I enjoy sitting here with my mouth hanging open... keeps things entertaining anyway. She is one who stands out by far..she could not be further on a scale from where I am- on the other side of an axis somewhere...
> 
> What you are saying here is Vulnerability is weakness also... I couldn't disagree with you more so...
> 
> Not that would you care for another perspective that could enlighten....*but I dare you *to take 20 minutes of your time and watch this video -1st line in this thread....


I watched the TED talk. I liked the presenter but found her conclusions faulty. Likely, since I am lacking in shame, she would say I'm not human LOL. I don't feel shame or unworthy, that is not why I do not connect with people. I have no desire to connect. What connections I have were made by circumstance or accident. Never by choice. Even hubs. That is a long story, but it boils down to circumstance. I can't say as I've ever sought anyone out....that would certainly go against my nature and I don't see the purpose in it. While I was watching that video I tried to think of who I'd miss if I never saw them again. Probably just hubs and the kids. I think I'd miss my cat more than any other people. 
Vulnerability and need are foreign concepts to me. I can only try to imagine what it would be like and I don't like the idea. I don't see any beauty in it. It seems foolhardy to do it intentionally, but I guess that is just another one of those things that people do that makes absolutely no sense to me.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> These were strangers, we had eloped
> .



Faithful,
Lemme ask you this.
How come you two choose to elope?


----------



## Faithful Wife

I wanted to spend our entire budget on the honeymoon, not a wedding. So instead of spending money on a wedding venue and reception, etc, we spent all our money on a three week vacation in paradise (we don't live in paradise like you do!). No one in our family could afford a trip to Hawaii to attend the wedding but honestly, it was so intimate and beautiful that I do not regret it one moment. I love my family but this ceremony was about us. None of them felt slighted over not being able to be there, they were just happy for us.

When we came back we threw a big party (a cheap one, in our home), we showed the video on a big screen...it was kinda like them being there.

I pm'd you and Red a link to a picture.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> I wanted to spend our entire budget on the honeymoon, not a wedding. So instead of spending money on a wedding venue and reception, etc, we spent all our money on a three week vacation in paradise (we don't live in paradise like you do!). No one in our family could afford a trip to Hawaii to attend the wedding but honestly, it was so intimate and beautiful that I do not regret it one moment. I love my family but this ceremony was about us. None of them felt slighted over not being able to be there, they were just happy for us.
> 
> When we came back we threw a big party (a cheap one, in our home), we showed the video on a big screen...it was kinda like them being there.
> 
> I pm'd you and Red a link to a picture.


Thanks!
Lovely wedding story [ lovely dress], and lovely tropical wedding.
You and your husband look picture perfect!
So too the guy with the conch shell and the banjo...
You all look great
Wish you guys the V-E-R-Y best: smthumbup:


----------



## TCSRedhead

The word 'need' definitely has come up in various circumstances in our marriage. I do need my husband. I need him emotionally, physically and mentally in our marriage. I know he needs me as well. 

Would I survive without him? Of course I would, just as he would survive me. It would leave a large, empty hole in my heart and soul without him though.


----------



## Catherine602

SA when I wrote that statement your husband is the man I thought of. I think that a small proportion of men are like your husband. I 

let me see if i have this right - men want wives that follow without giving them lip or resistance, do what ever he deems appropriate. At the same time, she should be sexually enthusiastic and willing to try what ever his imagination comes up with and at a frequency that suits him. She should be monogamous, a housekeeper, cook, broodmare and good mother. She should be quite and not demand anything. 

Moreover, she must understand that men are not naturally monogamous. In deference to his great sacrifihce, she should pretend she is a different woman frequently to keep him entertained. They are also visual so she mustn't be insecure when he stares at other women and imagines having sex with them. 

She needs to undestand if he cheats or decides he wants a new model. Well she has no choice because he is calling all of the shots. 

I am not making this stuff up. This is the aggregate of the posts that I have read on this forum. I look at the above and I can understand why women don't want a man to lead. Think about it- would any sentien being want to be lead down the hell hole with such a person? 

Everyone gets what they give. If men want to follow their genes, they can't expect a devoted and trusting wife.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## TCSRedhead

Catherine602 said:


> SA when I wrote that statement your husband is the man I thought of. I think that a small proportion of men are like your husband. I
> 
> let me see if i have this right - men want wives that follow without giving them lip or resistance, do what ever he deems appropriate. At the same time, she should be sexually enthusiastic and willing to try what ever his imagination comes up with and at a frequency that suits him. She should be monogamous, a housekeeper, cook, broodmare and good mother. She should be quite and not demand anything.
> 
> Moreover, she must understand that men are not naturally monogamous. In deference to his great sacrifihce, she should pretend she is a different woman frequently to keep him entertained. They are also visual so she mustn't be insecure when he stares at other women and imagines having sex with them.
> 
> She needs to undestand if he cheats or decides he wants a new model. Well she has no choice because he is calling all of the shots.
> 
> I am not making this stuff up. This is the aggregate of the posts that I have read on this forum. I look at the above and I can understand why women don't want a man to lead. Think about it- would any sentien being want to be lead down the hell hole with such a person?
> 
> Everyone gets what they give. If men want to follow their genes, they can't expect a devoted and trusting wife.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Catherine - I haven't seen that at all. Maybe you and I are reading with different glasses. In a submissive wife model, the man has to earn that trust and respect by putting his wife's needs/wishes first. He needs to be a good provider, protect and care for his wife and family and be a loving husband to her. In return, I love, honor and obey what he wishes in our marriage. 

I am hardly the barefoot and pregnant brood mare waiting on him hand and foot while he belches and scratches himself on the couch. 

If my husband were a selfish jerk, didn't put me first and who had sex with other women, he wouldn't be worthy of that trust. 

It's another way of thinking - just not yours.


----------



## Topical storm

Living in Canada where people can leave their doors unlocked, low crime rate, and dwell among the most civilized well behaved citizens on earth can shape one's views. It's no surprise that the western philosophy and its many advances has shaped some women's views to believe they are on par with men. All men are created equal but all men are not the same.

Some people need to realize that their roles and philosophy are due to those who protected it. If it wasn't for a couple world wars, most men would expect their wives them to stay in the kitchen. You give someone an inch and they'll take a mile. Give someone a little power, and before you know it they start thinking they are more adept at running the show.


----------



## Tall Average Guy

LadyOfTheLake said:


> I don't WANT him to be unhappy. I try to be accomodating, up to a point. I understand the male ego and how he wouldn't want me sleeping near another male. We had this issue arise last month. I was away on an overnight fishing trip and was offered a place to crash at a guy friends place. It would have been cheaper and easier to stay there and get an early start. But dh was obviously uncomfortable with it. In fact, it made him angry that I even suggested it. I weighed the pros and cons for awhile and when dh asked what I was going to do I told him I'd grab a hotel for the night. That made him feel better. I want him to be happy, so I was happy too. In my mind, the male ego is a crippling thing and concessions must be made from time to time. I don't always give in like that, but in that case I did want him to be happy with my decision.


Why does his "male ego" matter? It is merely an unattractive weakness. And why does it matter that he is unhappy? You are your own person, independent of him. He has no say in anything you do. That he is unhappy has no effect on anything, so why bother taking that into consideration?

It is puzzling that you don't seem to even understand why he is angry, other than to dismiss it as mere "male ego". If he decided to do the same with a women, I take it that would be just fine? if while you were out of town, he decided on a night of dinner and dancing with another women, you would have no issue because you have no "female ego"?



> As for your latter statement...I don't understand? Of course my partner only matters as much as I say he matters. That is the way it is with everyone. No one can make themselves matter MORE to someone else. You don't have that kind of control over people.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


The marriage is all about you. Every action appears to be viewed through the lens of what you get out of it. As long as it is convenient, you will take his thoughts into consideration, but it seems clear that you don't do so on your own account. Your suggestion of staying the night with a male friend pretty clearly demonstrates that your husband is pretty far down on the list of people you consider. Thus, it looks like your husband only matters as long as it is convenient. 

But as long as he is aware of where he stands, then I can't argue that it is unfair.


----------



## Acorn

The concept of not needing your spouse seems so foreign to me. My ex and I used to talk about that all the time - I would tell her I needed her, and she would ask, "I don't need you. Why don't you just want me?"

I can't help but think I want $10,000 and I want to be invited to the cheerleader tryouts, but my love for her was so much deeper. I needed her.

I do not think she has the capability or desire to become vulnerable, and would rather be self sufficient. Good for her I guess, but I think she's missing out.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Catherine said: "let me see if i have this right - men want wives that follow without giving them lip or resistance, do what ever he deems appropriate. At the same time, she should be sexually enthusiastic and willing to try what ever his imagination comes up with and at a frequency that suits him. She should be monogamous, a housekeeper, cook, broodmare and good mother. She should be quite and not demand anything. 

Moreover, she must understand that men are not naturally monogamous. In deference to his great sacrifihce, she should pretend she is a different woman frequently to keep him entertained. They are also visual so she mustn't be insecure when he stares at other women and imagines having sex with them. 

She needs to undestand if he cheats or decides he wants a new model. Well she has no choice because he is calling all of the shots. 

I am not making this stuff up. This is the aggregate of the posts that I have read on this forum. I look at the above and I can understand why women don't want a man to lead. Think about it- would any sentien being want to be lead down the hell hole with such a person? 

Everyone gets what they give. If men want to follow their genes, they can't expect a devoted and trusting wife."

(end quote)

Catherine...I am seeing two trains of thought here by men...the ones that you are describing above are the misguided (IMO) guys who follow the MMSL type of nonsense. Everything you said above is crap they say at MMSL. You forgot the part that "women don't know what they want and men must tell them". (Although I will say, I do not think MMSL advocates cheating, they just advocate oggling, flirting with other women to make your wife jealous, and porn use).

But the above train of thought is not what I'm seeing in a good number of the other men here. CM, Deejo, and several others, are not saying the same thing you quoted above.

The ones who ARE saying what you wrote above kind of ruin it for the good guys like Deejo and CM....and SA's husband (an example).


----------



## Caribbean Man

Catherine602 said:


> SA when I wrote that statement your husband is the man I thought of. I think that a small proportion of men are like your husband. I
> 
> let me see if i have this right - men want wives that follow without giving them lip or resistance, do what ever he deems appropriate. At the same time, she should be sexually enthusiastic and willing to try what ever his imagination comes up with and at a frequency that suits him. She should be monogamous, a housekeeper, cook, broodmare and good mother. She should be quite and not demand anything.
> 
> Moreover, she must understand that men are not naturally monogamous. In deference to his great sacrifihce, she should pretend she is a different woman frequently to keep him entertained. They are also visual so she mustn't be insecure when he stares at other women and imagines having sex with them.
> 
> She needs to undestand if he cheats or decides he wants a new model. Well she has no choice because he is calling all of the shots.
> 
> I am not making this stuff up. This is the aggregate of the posts that I have read on this forum. I look at the above and I can understand why women don't want a man to lead. Think about it- would any sentien being want to be lead down the hell hole with such a person?
> 
> Everyone gets what they give. If men want to follow their genes, they can't expect a devoted and trusting wife.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Catherine,
Both models you speak of, male and female, must be from the 16th century.

I don't know any man who wants a wife who could only cook , have sex , and housekeep.

I didn't marry mine for that.
In fact I cook, I do the laundry and I do the dishes most of the times.
And she's not a " career woman ", we both run a business together.
I do these things not as a division of chores, but because I too , live in this house. I love doing it and I see no problem in doing it.
At times we both do it together like so many other things.

I married her for her views on life , family and marriage.
I thought that we could both be happy together in a monogamous marriage.
And so far, I was right.
The sex, the hot ,spicy curries that she cooks so welll and her interior decorating skills are just the icing on the cake.


----------



## Deejo

*Re: Re: You go Gabby*



Catherine602 said:


> *Everyone gets what they give.* If men want to follow their genes, they can't expect a devoted and trusting wife.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I hope you dont really mean that. Because we both know it isn't remotely true.

Were that the case these forums would be filled with very different discussions about marriage.


----------



## tacoma

The legbeard is strong in this thread
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Caribbean Man

Acorn said:


> The concept of not needing your spouse seems so foreign to me. My ex and I used to talk about that all the time - I would tell her I needed her, and she would ask, "I don't need you. Why don't you just want me?"
> 
> I can't help but think I want $10,000 and I want to be invited to the cheerleader tryouts, but my love for her was so much deeper. I needed her.
> 
> I do not think she has the capability or desire to become vulnerable, and would rather be self sufficient. Good for her I guess, but I think she's missing out.


:iagree:

And I find myself really trying to understand the concept.
Its so strange to me.
Not that I could apply it to my life, 
but I think its interesting how different people view relationships so differently...


----------



## tacoma

Deejo said:


> I hope you dont really mean that. Because we both know it isn't remotely true.
> 
> Were that the case these forums would be filled with very different discussions about marriage.


thank you for the injection of sanity into an otherwise delusional thread.

I hear everything you ladies are saying but I have yet to see a single marriage that works as described.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Faithful Wife




----------



## ScarletBegonias

tacoma said:


> but I have yet to see a single marriage that works as described.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I really hope if I do the marriage thing again,the dynamic I've grown to love with SO will work.


----------



## Faithful Wife

"I hear everything you ladies are saying but I have yet to see a single marriage that works as described."

I don't get this. If we aren't going to accept each other's word that our marriages are as we describe them (like you maybe think someone is just saying their marriage is one way but actually they are lying?), then what is the point of any discussion?

Is it not assumed we are at least stating the truth about our own situations?

If not, then all we need to do is say "I don't believe you" when someone self-reports their own happiness and that ends the discussion. Why would we bother to be here if we all think others are lying? I don't think anyone here is lying so if they report their marriage works as self-reported, I believe them. If I thought you all were a bunch of liars, I wouldn't bother to post here.


----------



## tacoma

ScarletBegonias said:


> I really hope if I do the marriage thing again,the dynamic I've grown to love with SO will work.


I'm sorry Scarlet I' m overly generalizing again.

I shouldn't have implied "all" the ladies in this thread
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> *Faithful wife said*: I wanted to spend our entire budget on the honeymoon, not a wedding. So instead of spending money on a wedding venue and reception, etc, we spent all our money on a three week vacation in paradise (we don't live in paradise like you do!).


 We did the exact opposite, put it all in our Wedding -had about 350 at the reception...and skipped our Honeymoon - We had every dime paid before the day, we paid for it all (except his dad picked up the Catering- friends of his Mom)



TCSRedhead said:


> FW and SA, both of your ceremonies sound so beautiful.
> 
> We had a small ceremony in our pastor's house. Our two best friends were there as were my mom, dad and our daughters. It was ridiculously small but so personal *and non-traditional*.


 We did some Non-Traditional...... I wore a T-length gown.... because I saved so much here, I bought the girls their strapless dresses, found this fantastic clearance sale for $19 each & Bought them on the spot- then we picked up the guys Tuxes too! 

My Father wouldn't walk me down the aisle unless he could wear Jeans (don't ask, love him anyway!).. ..so our Photographer came up with this idea to have me walk half way up -while HE walked half way down...take my hand in his, kiss it...and we walked back up together... LOVED THAT... Bless my Father for being a stick in the mudd!









Our good friends made us a wedding Float for the whole party to ride on...down a country road, that was a lot of fun...









I was into Heavy Metal & wanted that DJ to play some of it, I was MY day after all...danced all night...seen my aunt plugging her ears.. The Dj got the crowd all riled up for him to take my garter off with his teeth...great memories.



> *Coffee4me said*: SA just to give you a different perspective. Being independent for me is not at all about NOT needing anyone. It's about survival. I need people, *I have an extremely interdependent family, my whole family functions in the "it takes a village mindset" we most definitly need each other.* *We rely on each other and help each other in ways that are quite uncommon in todays modern world. *


 This is something I NEVER had growing up, My Mother left me -running off with An Alcoholic when I was 10....No siblings....

My Step Mom wanted my dad to herself.. without friends and a Grandmother next door, I would have been one lonely teen... So yeah... when I met the boyfriend... it meant a hell of a lot to me... at 18... on a date with him, came home to HER having my entire bedroom on the porch... I was on my own...

Lived in a camper in the back of someones yard for a summer, had a full time job & a car...It was husbands dad who told me to come live with them... Should I feel less of myself that I wasn't this "independent woman"....before I fell in love. I so often get that vibe in posts here...obviously I am sensitive to it...but you know what..I wouldn't change a thing I did ...I love my LIFE.... I love my path....

So the type of man who wants to love & help the "damsel in distress"..yeah I kinda WAS HER.....I DIG HIM......this doesn't mean I am unworthy or couldn't be a grand help to such a man....

Not many men like him exist anymore.. I know this. I may not have a career ...but I make a damn good Wife & Know how to manage a household and a happy family. 

It just seems this doesn't mean anything anymore in society. You have to DO it all...and BE it all. Or yeah...you are less. It's the message. 




> *I am raising my daughter to be independent and proud.* So she can stand on her own when necessary but the reality is she will walk through this life with her brother close beside her. Just as I have.
> 
> I hope that she gets married and is able to find a partner with which she can live in love and safety and together they can accomplish great things. *But she will have have the tools necessary to stand alone- just in case*


When everyone feels this way..* the independent and PROUD.*.. it still towers over me -like I have very little to be proud of... but I am too...I guess what I am proud of is...our marriage... our life...what we have accomplished together as a team.... not so much that I am capable of doing it all on my own.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

tacoma said:


> I'm sorry Scarlet I' m overly generalizing again.
> 
> I shouldn't have implied "all" the ladies in this thread
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


oh I didn't take offense or feel generalized,I really am hoping I get it right if I do it again.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Tall Average Guy said:


> Why does his "male ego" matter? It is merely an unattractive weakness. And why does it matter that he is unhappy? You are your own person, independent of him. He has no say in anything you do. That he is unhappy has no effect on anything, so why bother taking that into consideration?
> 
> It is puzzling that you don't seem to even understand why he is angry, other than to dismiss it as mere "male ego". If he decided to do the same with a women, I take it that would be just fine? if while you were out of town, he decided on a night of dinner and dancing with another women, you would have no issue because you have no "female ego"?
> 
> 
> 
> The marriage is all about you. Every action appears to be viewed through the lens of what you get out of it. As long as it is convenient, you will take his thoughts into consideration, but it seems clear that you don't do so on your own account. Your suggestion of staying the night with a male friend pretty clearly demonstrates that your husband is pretty far down on the list of people you consider. Thus, it looks like your husband only matters as long as it is convenient.
> 
> But as long as he is aware of where he stands, then I can't argue that it is unfair.


I deferred to his ego because, like I said, concessions must be made for it. His is relatively benign compared to others that I see. Whether it's that way naturally or he's learned to control it due to my influence, I don't know. Like I said, we've been together a long time. If I were to have gone ahead and slept at my friends house, it would have made things awkward with DH. He likely would have been angry at me and carried on and pouted and made an a$$ of himself and I really don't have the patience for that. So I chose the situation that would entail the least amount of drama. 
Of course it was just ego, possessiveness. He was staking a claim on me and I tolerated it for the sake of peace at home. My friend understood. 
Me crashing at a friends house is hardly comparable to him taking a woman out on a date. He does go out for coffee with his female friend and I don't have anything to say about that...it's not my place to interfere with who he hangs out with. I wouldn't dream of it. 

This marriage is not all about me. Not by far. He has more freedom than most married men, I gather. So that is a big bonus for him. Like I've said before, I interfere very little in his affairs, he does as he pleases for the most part. I'm actually a very easy wife to have...I don't make any demands on him....well very few. And if he doesn't follow through....meh, I don't really care. The few things I've asked for that don't ever change....I can live without. Fair is fair, so long as I have my freedom I guess.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

Acorn said:


> I do not think she has the capability or desire to become vulnerable, and would rather be self sufficient. Good for her I guess, but I think she's missing out.


On what, exactly? I really would like to know.


----------



## Shooboomafoo

The concept of submission to me does not include accepting abuse of any kind. Submission out of love, because the husband should also be submissive to the health of the marriage and the fulfillment of his wife's needs. The "mutual" submission to each other sounds like a really awesome deal. People who read that part of the Bible like to picture a woman being whipped and treated like a slave...
Not the case.
The concept of loving one another is lost as a pretense in that thoughtset.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

I have to say this bc the last few pages have been irking the heck out of me even though I've been part of it.

LOTL,I need to commend you for being so level in your responses to everyone.I feel you've been getting a lot of downward glare type responses to your posts,I think I am guilty of doing it too,and you've not once lost your composure.

While I wasn't thrilled with the enlightenment post and it rubbed me wrong,I still have to give you kudos and respect bc I would have lost my temper about 10 pages ago.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Faithful Wife said:


> "I hear everything you ladies are saying but I have yet to see a single marriage that works as described."
> 
> I don't get this. If we aren't going to accept each other's word that our marriages are as we describe them (like you maybe think someone is just saying their marriage is one way but actually they are lying?), then what is the point of any discussion?
> 
> Is it not assumed we are at least stating the truth about our own situations?
> 
> If not, then all we need to do is say "I don't believe you" when someone self-reports their own happiness and that ends the discussion. Why would we bother to be here if we all think others are lying? I don't think anyone here is lying so if they report their marriage works as self-reported, I believe them. If I thought you all were a bunch of liars, I wouldn't bother to post here.


It's only the women who are liars. The men here all have awesome marriages.

Signed, 

Carping and crowing Legbeard who should make my husband the Captain.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

ScarletBegonias said:


> I have to say this bc the last few pages have been irking the heck out of me even though I've been part of it.
> 
> LOTL,I need to commend you for being so level in your responses to everyone.I feel you've been getting a lot of downward glare type responses to your posts,I think I am guilty of doing it too,and you've not once lost your composure.
> 
> While I wasn't thrilled with the enlightenment post and it rubbed me wrong,I still have to give you kudos and respect bc I would have lost my temper about 10 pages ago.


LOL, I totally understand that I am the freak in this circus. I don't mind getting jumped on and no one has been disrespectful. I think people are just curious, and in some cases, defensive. That is ok by me.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Signed,
> 
> Carping and crowing Legbeard who should make my husband the Captain.


omg dying :rofl:


----------



## Faithful Wife

"The "mutual" submission to each other sounds like a really awesome deal. People who read that part of the Bible like to picture a woman being whipped and treated like a slave...
Not the case."

It isn't?

The being tied up and whipped is the only part I liked!


----------



## Shooboomafoo

YEah me too, it was the scrub brushing that I had a problem with.


----------



## sinnister

People get way too hung up on "terms". Alpha, Beta, dominant, submissive....they are words that are used to describe constructs that vary all over their respective spectrums.

It's impossible to characterize what each TRULY means because they mean different things at different times.

Keeping that in mind, I don't understand the strong feelings for or against. It's like arguing against water. Why? It's just as helpful as it can be destructive.


----------



## LadyOfTheLake

sinnister said:


> People get way too hung up on "terms". Alpha, Beta, dominant, submissive....they are words that are used to describe constructs that vary all over their respective spectrums.
> 
> It's impossible to characterize what each TRULY means because they mean different things at different times.
> 
> Keeping that in mind, I don't understand the strong feelings for or against. It's like arguing against water. Why? It's just as helpful as it can be destructive.


We aren't arguing about terms, we are arguing about principles. The principle behind female submission to male leadership. But no one has come up with a good reason for why women should submit to men. Because there isn't one. 

Then there were tangential discussions on different marriage formats and whether they could work or not.

But no reasoning on female to male submission. 

Because there are no valid reasons for such.


----------



## always_alone

SimplyAmorous said:


> When everyone feels this way..* the independent and PROUD.*.. it still towers over me -like I have very little to be proud of... but I am too...I guess what I am proud of is...our marriage... our life...what we have accomplished together as a team.... not so much that I am capable of doing it all on my own.


But it's not better or worse, or something to be more or less proud of. It's justdifferent paths and personalities.

For me, independence was essential to my survival. There just wasn't anyone who was willing to look after me. I was out of my parents' house at 16, and had no loving boyfriend, and no family willing to take me in. So, I looked after myself. 

It's not even something I'm particularly proud of. It's just the way it was. And i certainly won't look down on someone who is different and has followed a different path. Sometimes I was jealous of those who had found someone to love and who loved them. Other times, I was simply thankful that I was strong enough to be on my own because i saw how awful some of the relationships around me were (full of hurtful behaviours, cheating, violence)..

Similarly, I doubt that Lady of the Lake is the cold, selfish fish that people are making her out to be on this thread. I don't know her story, but i don't find her approach that strange. I too can't really fathom giving up my independence, especially after having it so long. And as Catherine said, many men make it quite clear that submitting to them could only lead to heartbreak and despair.

My take is that we all do the best we can with what we've got. And from what little i know of your story, I'd say you have as much to be proud of as anybody.


----------



## TCSRedhead

I definitely think there are a variety of models that work as evidenced in most of our friends/families. 

I don't appreciate being told that my marriage is unenlightened or that my husband views me as a brood mare who should cook, clean and shut up. Seriously?

I just ask for mutual tolerance in the conversation.


----------



## Deejo

LadyOfTheLake said:


> We aren't arguing about terms, we are arguing about principles. The principle behind female submission to male leadership. But no one has come up with a good reason for why women should submit to men. Because there isn't one.
> 
> Then there were tangential discussions on different marriage formats and whether they could work or not.
> 
> But no reasoning on female to male submission.
> 
> Because there are no valid reasons for such.


Nah ... we're arguing to argue at this point.
It isn't about principles or reasons. Because even were they in place and valid ... nobody's gonna buy them anyway.

I'm happy that she's happy.

I'm happy that you're happy.

I'm pretty happy too.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

always_alone said:


> But it's not better or worse, or something to be more or less proud of. It's justdifferent paths and personalities.
> 
> For me, independence was essential to my survival. There just wasn't anyone who was willing to look after me. I was out of my parents' house at 16, and had no loving boyfriend, and no family willing to take me in. So, I looked after myself.
> 
> It's not even something I'm particularly proud of. It's just the way it was. And i certainly won't look down on someone who is different and has followed a different path. Sometimes I was jealous of those who had found someone to love and who loved them. *Other times, I was simply thankful that I was strong enough to be on my own because i saw how awful some of the relationships around me were (full of hurtful behaviours, cheating, violence)*


 Had I not had anyone to lean on who cared......I would have felt the same.. and followed a similar path...no doubt. 

I had 3 part time jobs at one time back then...I didn't want to come off as taking advantage of anyone...I always showed my thankfulness in words/ actions & I did everything to pay my own way / Do my part....*this helped me feel good about myself* ...

I'd work my ass to the bone before I would ask for help...I do not like to bother people. I'm very funny like that. My husband is the same way, we'd eat out of the garbage 1st.. A little exaggeration there....but we'd go without before we'd ask anyone for help.... 



> Similarly, I doubt that Lady of the Lake is the cold, selfish fish that people are making her out to be on this thread.


 If her husband is happy with it, that is all that matters...at the end of the day... 2 people who are compatible enough -that they feel blessed to have the other in their lives. Her dynamic would never work for me or my husband ...nor would ours work for her. 



> And as Catherine said, many men make it quite clear that submitting to them could only lead to heartbreak and despair.


 It is very unfortunate... Where do all of these men get these awful behaviors -doesn't it all start in the home...what they were taught / the examples before them/ their experiences. 



> *My take is that we all do the best we can with what we've got. *And from what little i know of your story, I'd say you have as much to be proud of as anybody.


 Yes, this is all we can do. I knew I was vulnerable to USER men in my youth, I rejected every one of them. It matters very much who we attach ourselves to...or let in..because once you let him in, a "bonding" is in the making.


----------



## Tall Average Guy

LadyOfTheLake said:


> I deferred to his ego because, like I said, concessions must be made for it. His is relatively benign compared to others that I see. Whether it's that way naturally or he's learned to control it due to my influence, I don't know. Like I said, we've been together a long time. If I were to have gone ahead and slept at my friends house, it would have made things awkward with DH. He likely would have been angry at me and carried on and pouted and made an a$$ of himself and I really don't have the patience for that. So I chose the situation that would entail the least amount of drama.
> Of course it was just ego, possessiveness. He was staking a claim on me and I tolerated it for the sake of peace at home. My friend understood.
> Me crashing at a friends house is hardly comparable to him taking a woman out on a date. He does go out for coffee with his female friend and I don't have anything to say about that...it's not my place to interfere with who he hangs out with. I wouldn't dream of it.
> 
> This marriage is not all about me. Not by far. He has more freedom than most married men, I gather. So that is a big bonus for him. Like I've said before, I interfere very little in his affairs, he does as he pleases for the most part. I'm actually a very easy wife to have...I don't make any demands on him....well very few. And if he doesn't follow through....meh, I don't really care. The few things I've asked for that don't ever change....I can live without. Fair is fair, so long as I have my freedom I guess.


I don't see the difference in those example, but that does not really matter. 

I do think I need to stop this. This works for you, and just because it would not work for me does not make it wrong. I appreciate you taking the time to explain it.


----------



## Kobo

sinnister said:


> People get way too hung up on "terms". Alpha, Beta, dominant, submissive....they are words that are used to describe constructs that vary all over their respective spectrums.


So much truth.


----------



## Deejo

The word that keeps getting left out that I find disappointing, and was stated at the outset, is;

reciprocal or reciprocity.


----------



## Acorn

LadyOfTheLake said:


> On what, exactly? I really would like to know.


It's probably a point of view thing.

I could buy an expensive boat, keep it in the dock, and quietly enjoy owning the boat and watching it slowly appreciate value, never actually risking taking the boat on the open water. I certainly know people who have done just this and have been perfectly happy.

Or, I could invite my friends over, set a course deep into the waves, risking my investment as I feel the mist and the wind rush over my skin, hearing my friends cheer with delight as the speed keeps increasing, and riding the emotional high of opening the boat up and really seeing what the two of us can do together. IMO, boats weren't meant to sit idly next to the pier.

Not the perfect example, but it will suffice.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

TCSRedhead said:


> I definitely think there are a variety of models that work as evidenced in most of our friends/families.
> 
> I don't appreciate being told that my marriage is unenlightened or that my husband views me as a brood mare who should cook, clean and shut up. Seriously?
> 
> *I just ask for mutual tolerance in the conversation*.


We are the minority today...I guess I don't care all that much really so long as they can put up with my rambling on here..... Anymore I expect to be brushed off cause I can't relate...told we're not living in the 1950's anymore. 

But yeah it surely depends on the man...If I see my daughter falling for a Guy who doesn't have shining character, self aware at his age/ by his actions taking ownership...great signs of maturity and resolve to DO the best for her...hopefully with years proving this out...

Me & her dad would be the 1st to tell her she'd be a fool to align herself with him...but I'd say this whether she went to College & got a degree (which we plan to be the case ) or not...



> *Acorn said*: It's probably a point of view thing.
> 
> I could buy an expensive boat, keep it in the dock, and quietly enjoy owning the boat and watching it slowly appreciate value, never actually risking taking the boat on the open water. I certainly know people who have done just this and have been perfectly happy.
> 
> Or, I could invite my friends over, set a course deep into the waves, risking my investment as I feel the mist and the wind rush over my skin, hearing my friends cheer with delight as the speed keeps increasing, and riding the emotional high of opening the boat up and really seeing what the two of us can do together. IMO, boats weren't meant to sit idly next to the pier.
> 
> Not the perfect example, but it will suffice.


 I like your thoughts here...for whatever the intended meaning was specifically. 

Makes me think of my Grandmother who was so cautious with her Fine china, sitting up on her shelf all wrapped so it couldn't be damaged...guess what...she died before she ever took it down & used it on all of us for a special holiday....Just couldn't see the sense in that...personally.


----------



## TCSRedhead

SimplyAmorous said:


> we're not living in the 1950's anymore.


We're not??? Man, I'm always the last to know. Guess I should put away the circle skirt, apron and heels now. Pfft


----------



## tacoma

Faithful Wife said:


> "I hear everything you ladies are saying but I have yet to see a single marriage that works as described."
> 
> I don't get this. If we aren't going to accept each other's word that our marriages are as we describe them (like you maybe think someone is just saying their marriage is one way but actually they are lying?), then what is the point of any discussion?
> 
> Is it not assumed we are at least stating the truth about our own situations?
> 
> If not, then all we need to do is say "I don't believe you" when someone self-reports their own happiness and that ends the discussion. Why would we bother to be here if we all think others are lying? I don't think anyone here is lying so if they report their marriage works as self-reported, I believe them. If I thought you all were a bunch of liars, I wouldn't bother to post here.


I'm not accusing anyone of lying to me or the other posters on this board.

I believe some people are lying to themselves and don't even know it.


----------



## tacoma

Therealbrighteyes said:


> It's only the women who are liars. The men here all have awesome marriages.
> 
> Signed,
> 
> Carping and crowing Legbeard who should make my husband the Captain.


Could you please point out any post here that even comes close to 
alluding to what you've written here?

I don't think you can.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Well, that's kinda sad Tacoma....just when I was starting to believe that you are self-aware enough to know your own situation and not be lying to yourself, you have shown me you can't offer me the same?

Oh well. Nice knowin' ya.


----------



## Catherine602

TCSRedhead said:


> Catherine - I haven't seen that at all. Maybe you and I are reading with different glasses. In a submissive wife model, the man has to earn that trust and respect by putting his wife's needs/wishes first. He needs to be a good provider, protect and care for his wife and family and be a loving husband to her. In return, I love, honor and obey what he wishes in our marriage.
> 
> I am hardly the barefoot and pregnant brood mare waiting on him hand and foot while he belches and scratches himself on the couch.
> 
> If my husband were a selfish jerk, didn't put me first and who had sex with other women, he wouldn't be worthy of that trust.
> 
> It's another way of thinking - just not yours.


 I meant no disrespect to you or to anyone. It was my attempt at hyperbole and humour. You took offense and I am sorry I upset you. 

You may not have read my other post, I am submissive. My husband gives >100% of himself. I have to admit he is a better person than I and i can assure you that I don't think he is a selfish jerk. Submission is voluntary on my part and agreeable to my husband. Either of us can change our minds. Knowing that, I maintained my ability to live independently, if needed. 

Actually I meant all the comments about men. \ >}

.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

tacoma said:


> Could you please point out any post here that even comes close to
> alluding to what you've written here?
> 
> I don't think you can.


Sure, *yours*:

"Thank you for the injection of sanity into an otherwise delusional thread. I hear everything you ladies are saying but I have yet to see a single marriage that works as described" followed by "I believe some people are lying to themselves and don't even know it". 

Many of us ladies said repeatedly that a marriage based on equality works for us but because you have never seen it, therefore it must not be true and we are only lying to ourselves. That's pretty insulting to me and why are just the women liars? Couldn't all this man as Captain of the Universe under all circumstances model by a lie as well? I know men who have zero business being in a leadership position in any capacity.


----------



## tacoma

My wife is submissive to me in a very traditional way.
The woman I married wasn't at all, she was an independent ball busting ***** making her own calls everywhere and really didn't give a damn what I thought for the most part.

I ****ing LOVED THIS!!

Today, she won't arrange a sleepover for my kid without calling/texting to ok it with me first.

WTF happened?
I don't know really but I'll venture a guess.

I think she thought she found that knight in shining armor who was going to take her away from the ****ty life she had and wrap her up in that fairy tale all little girls are indoctrinated with from the moment they can spit up on their own.
And I did, (because it fed right into my white knight complex) and I think she "believes" this is the way she's supposed to be now that she has the loyal man,secure home, and 2.5 kids all wrapped up in a picket fence.
She thinks she's supposed to be "The Good Wife".
This is what she never had, wanted badly, and what was always being portrayed to her as "The Brass Ring".

I knew nothing about this when I married her, seriously.

How do I feel about it?


I guess I don't know, I been staring at that question for a full minute trying to answer it while typing this.

I'm thinking about it.


----------



## tacoma

Brighteyes said:
It's only the women who are liars. The men here all have awesome marriages.

Tacoma said:
Could you please point out any post here that even comes close to 
alluding to what you've written here?

I don't think you can.

Brighteyes said:
Sure, yours:

"Thank you for the injection of sanity into an otherwise delusional thread. I hear everything you ladies are saying but I have yet to see a single marriage that works as described" followed by "I believe some people are lying to themselves and don't even know it". 



Ok so please answer my question..

Can you point out in this thread where I said or alluded to ..

It's only the women who are liars. The men here all have awesome marriages.

I did not call the "women" here liars,
what I said is .. 

"I believe some people are lying to themselves and don't even know it". 


….nor did I even imply all the men have "awesome" marriages.

As a side note.



> Signed,
> 
> Carping and crowing Legbeard who should make my husband the Captain.


Do you know why I toss that "Legbeard" thing out in these gender wars brighteyes?

Because ever since I first used it I knew that when I did you'd remark about it when you saw it.
So far I've got around an 80% success rate.

I'm intentionally negging you brighteyes and you bite on it 80% of the time.

I got game.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Deejo said:


> The word that keeps getting left out that I find disappointing, and was stated at the outset, is;
> 
> reciprocal or reciprocity.


:iagree:

* Confirmatory bias *


----------



## Caribbean Man

LadyOfTheLake said:


> On what, exactly? I really would like to know.


On the essence of life.
Love.
To be alive is to be vulnerable.
To love is to open up yourself to the possibility of being disappointed and hurt, therin lies vulnerability
Cannot love without being vulnerable.


----------



## Deejo

Caribbean Man said:


> :iagree:
> 
> * Confirmatory bias *


Wee bit. Arguably on both sides. 

This is actually a pretty good reason why I believe that quite often:
"Well done is better than well said' - Ben Franklin, Inventor, Patriot, Playboy.


----------



## Faithful Wife

I challenged Tropical several times on the Game thread, because he would poke his nose in, make one insulting post directly toward me, from no where...I know nothing about him at all, nor what he was even talking about.

Then he would disappear...only to pop back in and insult me again 20 pages later...again, saying nothing else of any substance, no details about himself, nothing.

I figure he just has a boner for me...er I mean, confidence.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

Trenton said:


> Your post is what we should be attacking rather than our various relationships. How strange they're too busy attacking Lady and her relationship to even notice? I'm assuming it was so flaming dumb that no one even thought it was worth commenting on, I'd like to give others the benefit of the doubt.


Saw it.rolled eyes at it hardcore and moved on.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Deejo

Trenton said:


> SA, no offense, but I gather that you are the dominant one in your relationship. Replace your husband with an alpha freak who demands submission and you'd be so all up in that it's not even funny.


And you presume being an alpha freak demanding submission is how it's supposed to look and how it works? You obviously aren't alone, not singling you out T.

Which further means, this discussion was still-born out of the gate.

Because that certainly isn't what I'm talking about, nor are any of the other individuals referring to being submissive in a LTR.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

tacoma said:


> Brighteyes said:
> It's only the women who are liars. The men here all have awesome marriages.
> 
> Tacoma said:
> Could you please point out any post here that even comes close to
> alluding to what you've written here?
> 
> I don't think you can.
> 
> Brighteyes said:
> Sure, yours:
> 
> "Thank you for the injection of sanity into an otherwise delusional thread. I hear everything you ladies are saying but I have yet to see a single marriage that works as described" followed by "I believe some people are lying to themselves and don't even know it".
> 
> 
> 
> Ok so please answer my question..
> 
> Can you point out in this thread where I said or alluded to ..
> 
> It's only the women who are liars. The men here all have awesome marriages.
> 
> You said that you have never seen a marriage like I describe and then followed it up with people lie to themselves after saying you hear the women but.....
> 
> I did not call the "women" here liars,
> what I said is ..
> 
> "I believe some people are lying to themselves and don't even know it".
> 
> 
> ….nor did I even imply all the men have "awesome" marriages.
> 
> So why the need for the delusion comment as it pertains to women?
> 
> As a side note.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you know why I toss that "Legbeard" thing out in these gender wars brighteyes?
> 
> Because ever since I first used it I knew that when I did you'd remark about it when you saw it.
> So far I've got around an 80% success rate.
> 
> I'm intentionally negging you brighteyes and you bite on it 80% of the time.
> 
> Ohhhhh. Now you've shown your neg cards. Won't work anymore.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Trenton said:


> In the meantime, I'm reading the book and enjoying it. I'm wondering why I relate more to her husband than I do her though, and quite frankly, so far she doesn't seem like a surrendered wife in any way whatsoever.


^^^Good.
Then I MUST read this book!


----------



## Faithful Wife

None of the men on this thread seem like alpha freaks who demand submission. I don't think Trenton meant anything about anyone here when she made that comment to SA.


----------



## Ikaika

I am almost done reading the book... read it then we can discuss. Key chapter, chapter 3, "The Power of the List"

I say in the future post a book title, let everyone read it then we can have better footing on which discuss the information more clearly. I think many of you will be surprised at the larger context of the book. 

Again, I know Laird (I owned a few boards his dad made)... there is a reason he is called the 'weatherman' Hey what is the weather like today? Stormy? or Calm?


----------



## Deejo

Trenton said:


> In the meantime, I'm reading the book and enjoying it. I'm wondering why I relate more to her husband than I do her though, and quite frankly, so far she doesn't seem like a surrendered wife in any way whatsoever.


He's opinionated, driven, clarity of purpose, often ruled by his emotions and his mood changes like the weather ... thus the nickname.

You a Pisces by any chance?


----------



## tacoma

Trenton said:


> I know how I would feel about it. I would feel it was boring as all hell, ..


Yeah, one would think that.
I would think that if asked 15 years ago!

But it's not boring.
Maybe that's just my male ego.




> even if she was willing to bend over and take it any which way you asked her to.


She is.
But here's the thing.

Not long ago I told my daughter something and I wish I could remember the exact context of our convo but I do remember what I told her.

"When someone loves you so much they are willing to harm themselves for you, the only way to be worthy of that love is to make sure you never put them in a position to do so."

No, I'm really not sure how I feel about it.

I'm just thinking out loud.
Not sure I'm making sense ATM


----------



## Faithful Wife

Here's my book recommendation for this week. Let's discuss!

Different Loving: The World of Sexual Dominance and Submission: William Brame, Gloria Brame, Jon Jacobs: 9780679769569: Amazon.com: Books


----------



## Deejo

drerio said:


> I am almost done reading the book... read it then we can discuss. Key chapter, chapter 3, "The Power of the List"
> 
> I say in the future post a book title, let everyone read it then we can have better footing on which discuss the information more clearly. I think many of you will be surprised at the larger context of the book.
> 
> Again, I know Laird (I owned a few boards his dad made)... there is a reason he is called the 'weatherman' Hey what is the weather like today? Stormy? or Calm?


Sounds like a rational and presumably non-inflammatory plan. Ah, who am I kidding, we'll still find a way to fight about the book.

Let's let Trenton create the thread in the Ladies Lounge for cover.


----------



## tacoma

> I didn't take it that way this time, especially after you said what you did, or at least made the implication that we suffer from delusions of grandeur because you've never seen a marriage model like mine that works.


I urge you to re-read this thread as I never said such a thing.

I can see how my replies might be seen to include all women in this thread but they don't.
I'm sorry if they seem to.

But 

You hadn't even been in this thread at that time nor had you spoken about "your marriage model" as I haven't a clue what it is in order to be remarking on it.


----------



## Deejo

I'll default to my earlier post. 'Talking' about this is never, ever, going to reflect what it looks like in practice. So ... I'd rather just practice it methinks.



Trenton said:


> Please don't tell me what I think. I was using a stereotype extreme to make a point and you do intend to single me out because you just did it so unless you're on Ambien and having a moment...
> 
> My point was that SA is an aggressive person. She is not submissive. She submits to her husband because he is worthy and his case, I agree with her. I don't know any man that is at all like her husband and I also know that I'd not be able to stand him myself. That's OK. It's a relationship.
> 
> Why oh why do we have to break it down to fit some freaking mold and agree or disagree with it? This is really dumb of us and I'm wondering what it's going to prove?
> 
> Yes, love should be reciprocated or you should get out.
> 
> Maybe you should toss Alpha and Submissive and use language that is not clouded in a billion different derogative connotations. Just a thought.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Deejo said:


> *Wee bit. Arguably on both sides.
> *
> This is actually a pretty good reason why I believe that quite often:
> "*Well done is better than well said' - Ben Franklin, Inventor, Patriot, Playboy.*


^^Ha harrr!:smthumbup:

About confirmatory biases, my take is this ;
We all have our biases, 
My personal preference is self actualization and truth.
or,
Own your stuff .
Its the only path to enlightenment.


----------



## Deejo

Faithful Wife said:


> Here's my book recommendation for this week. Let's discuss!
> 
> Different Loving: The World of Sexual Dominance and Submission: William Brame, Gloria Brame, Jon Jacobs: 9780679769569: Amazon.com: Books


----------



## Faithful Wife

I can't see the picture! Is it just me?


----------



## Deejo

Trenton said:


> That's what I thought. You're taking Ambien.


To be very, very, clear. I wouldn't want you to be any way other than exactly as you are. Not you. Not any of the ladies here.

I enjoy the discussions. I don't need to be right, or to win. 

I'm on Adderall, not Ambien.


----------



## Deejo

Faithful Wife said:


> I can't see the picture! Is it just me?


son of a ... 

hang on.

How 'bout now, refresh.


----------



## Caribbean Man

drerio said:


> I am almost done reading the book... read it then we can discuss. Key chapter, chapter 3, "The Power of the List"
> 
> I say in the future post a book title, let everyone read it then we can have better footing on which discuss the information more clearly. I think many of you will be surprised at the larger context of the book.
> 
> Again, I know Laird (I owned a few boards his dad made)... there is a reason he is called the 'weatherman' Hey what is the weather like today? Stormy? or Calm?


:iagree:
Excellent^^^ idea.
Hope it makes a difference .....
Maybe?


----------



## Ikaika

Trenton said:


> It'll cost you
> 
> I told drerio that I only got to chapter one last night, on about page 11 and my schedule has temporarily picked up but you know I'll have plenty to say about it and won't be afraid to share it.
> 
> So far she's a likable woman and he seems more like a single minded, moody pain in the bum.


But, he along the late Andy Irons, surf monsters. 

Although Laird is pretty much sticks to big wave surfing. Used to seem him surf at a place not too far from where I grew up, "intersections"... When the big North Swells hit, intersections would break about a 1/2 mile out at sea with sets close to 40' face wave. 

He was the first one to surf this spot

"Code Red" Full Movie - Surfing Goes Huge At Teahupoo Tahiti - YouTube


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Deejo said:


> He's opinionated, driven, clarity of purpose, often ruled by his emotions and his mood changes like the weather ... thus the nickname.
> 
> You a Pisces by any chance?


Are those traits of a Pisces?


----------



## Caribbean Man

Deejo said:


> Sounds like a rational and presumably non-inflammatory plan. *Ah, who am I kidding, we'll still find a way to fight about the book.*
> 
> Let's let Trenton create the thread in the Ladies Lounge for cover.


^^^^:rofl::rofl::rofl:


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

tacoma said:


> I urge you to re-read this thread as I never said such a thing.
> 
> I can see how my replies might be seen to include all women in this thread but they don't.
> I'm sorry if they seem to.
> 
> But
> 
> You hadn't even been in this thread at that time nor had you spoken about "your marriage model" as I haven't a clue what it is in order to be remarking on it.


Huh? I've been on this site for 3 years, talked about my marriage model at great length and also in this thread said repeatedly that life is about compromise and even hammered out a very lengthy example from what happened to me a month ago. You takin' the same pills Deejo is?! :scratchhead:


----------



## Faithful Wife

:scratchhead:

I don't know what the scary-ass bird means?

Here is my response:


----------



## Faithful Wife

D'oh!


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Deejo said:


> To be very, very, clear. I wouldn't want you to be any way other than exactly as you are. Not you. Not any of the ladies here.
> 
> I enjoy the discussions. I don't need to be right, or to win.
> 
> I'm on Adderall, not Ambien.


Awe, really? So I'm not that scary afterall? I do snap when I walk down the street West Side Story style.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Ok Deejo...the old fashioned way...my response to the scary bird is....

Image Detail for - 1289360-fuzzy_bunny_2_super.jpg


----------



## tacoma

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Huh? I've been on this site for 3 years, talked about my marriage model at great length and also in this thread said repeatedly that life is about compromise and even hammered out a very lengthy example from what happened to me a month ago. You takin' the same pills Deejo is?! :scratchhead:


You haven't even been in this thread for three days and thirty pages.

How do you think I'm talking about you?


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

tacoma said:


> You haven't even been in this thread for three days and thirty pages.
> 
> How do you think I'm talking about you?


You said ladies in this thread. I've been on this thread from the get go.


----------



## Catherine602

Faithful Wife said:


> I challenged Tropical several times on the Game thread, because he would poke his nose in, make one insulting post directly toward me, from no where...I know nothing about him at all, nor what he was even talking about.
> 
> Then he would disappear...only to pop back in and insult me again 20 pages later...again, saying nothing else of any substance, no details about himself, nothing.
> 
> I figure he just has a boner for me...er I mean, confidence.


He's a jack -a-napes maybe? Could explain the popping up to bite every now and again. Couldn't be a jack -in-the-box cause their nice. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## SimplyAmorous

TCSRedhead said:


> We're not??? Man, I'm always the last to know. *Guess I should put away the circle skirt, apron and heels now*. Pfft


I so enjoy dressing up like that....when I'm cooking his breakfast that I happily get up for every morning... not because he demands it - but because I want to...I want to serve him.. ....then he'll serve me ....pulling my apron strings & lifting my dress...while I put a heel up on his chair.... then we'll grab the whipped cream heading up the steps... 












Trenton said:


> SA, no offense, but I gather that you are the dominant one in your relationship. *Replace your husband with an alpha freak who demands submission and you'd be so all up in that it's not even funny*.


 Alpha freak sounds terribly conceited to me, would hate it.... let's see...

.. If an Alpha was too emotionally absent (seems this is common)......not living that honoring & cherishing ... showing an appreciation of my role as well......if we didn't share similar beliefs.... feelings towards Fatherhood / the importance of family....How to discipline...I would also care how he views SEX....and being a Romancer in the physical (I could care less about gifts)......

It would also help if his feelings on money was similar to mine cause I abhor being in debt.....plus I'd kick & scream living in the city... I don't like people THAT much.......I also would not do well married to a Workaholic.... I'd prefer to sacrifice some shiny new THINGS & the high life for a more simple existence & much togetherness. 

If all of that was in place .....Hmmmm ....yeah, I think an Alpha might do me fine.... (I would say MY father is MUCH of this -minus wanting a larger family). 

My step Mom is a woman you don't cross... I hated her in my teens.... but never did I have the sense she was ABOVE my dad or more dominant... he was the "head" in that marriage....but like me, he cares about her input...they had great communication .... he was a considerate Husband..... 

I know she has spoken of times where HE laid the hammer down...he spoke & that was IT... the matter was settled.... I can't say I ever remember them fighting..... .but it's another case where they just had the same Passions & pursuits.....so it worked very well. 

Faithful wife & Her husband are both Alphas...it works for them...still comes down to *compatibility *to me. 



> I don't know any man that is at all like her husband and *I also know that I'd not be able to stand him myself.*


 Awe .... that's a low BLOW...he'd be too boring for you I presume....you need more excitement /Mystery / Fireworks ...or you'd grow bored.... I know ..I know...most women DO... No surprise to me....I prefer Romance & a Best friend love affair over those things... 

This doesn't mean we are boring though...He is not a Mr Rogers...One could say I BRING enough excitement & stirring challenge for the 2 of us...I asked him one day what he would miss most if I died...I was hoping he'd say ...But his answer was....."your liveliness"....he feeds off of it..and frankly... although I do think I am awesome.... I DON'T feel the majority of men could handle me the way he does.....and no doubt, in some ways I can be "demanding"...there is a list of things I would not put up with in a man. 

But really, I am not brow beating him or anything...we really DO like the same SH**, THINK alike even....he is not putting himself down...while I sit on a Pedestal...and walk all over him..... I am much TOO SENSITIVE of a woman to be this sort of wife....or he would have never wanted me. 



> *Coffee4more said:* SA YOU have EVERYTHING to be proud of!!!!! You are the backbone of your family. That is the most important thing in LIFE to be proud of-- FAMILY.
> 
> Yes, I enjoy working but every single person I have ever worked with will tell you I'm all about my family and SO proud of my kids. *The reason I could maintain my career is because of my family.*
> 
> My SIL is a SAHM, she is my sister in my heart. * I could NEVER have done what I did with my career if it were not for the wonderful, loving mom that she is. She watched my children and her's 4 all together. * I could NEVER do what she did. She is AMAZING with schedules and gave each kid her love an attention and is so patient.


 This is what I *envied* growing up .... big happy families who was there for each other... why I so desperately reached for that.... I can't say we ever had any help but one dear friend who'd always offer to watch our kids...even beg me.... I never complained once about not having help though...just felt so thankful for the opportunity to be a Mother of children... 

I'm not as sweet as your sister in Law...she sounds wonderful.... :smthumbup:..... where I shine is allowing them Loud "up all night" parties/ Bonfires, they know they can say "Hey Mom, can I have 7 friends spend the night at the drop of a hat and I'll say.."SURE.. I'll get some pizzas" & whip something together...do a movie outside maybe.... I want them to enjoy their life to the fullest ...I knew how much friends meant to me when I was growing up... I want them to have those sort of memories too... I'm not the doting Mom as much as the COOL Mom.




> I thank my lucky stars every day that she joined our family. Her job and mine were EQUALLY as important. Our kids have the best of both worlds a working mom and a SAHM, we are best friends. I rely on her strengths so much and she relys on mine. I'm able to guide and teach her kids from my experiences. She is able to teach my daughter things I'm awful at like baking.


 That is surely the best of both worlds....and seeing your example of Friendship as well. 

Thank you for your words Coffee4me


----------



## Catherine602

tacoma said:


> My wife is submissive to me in a very traditional way.
> The woman I married wasn't at all, she was an independent ball busting ***** making her own calls everywhere and really didn't give a damn what I thought for the most part.
> 
> I ****ing LOVED THIS!!
> 
> Today, she won't arrange a sleepover for my kid without calling/texting to ok it with me first.
> 
> WTF happened?
> I don't know really but I'll venture a guess.
> 
> I think she thought she found that knight in shining armor who was going to take her away from the ****ty life she had and wrap her up in that fairy tale all little girls are indoctrinated with from the moment they can spit up on their own.
> And I did, (because it fed right into my white knight complex) and I think she "believes" this is the way she's supposed to be now that she has the loyal man,secure home, and 2.5 kids all wrapped up in a picket fence.
> She thinks she's supposed to be "The Good Wife".
> This is what she never had, wanted badly, and what was always being portrayed to her as "The Brass Ring".
> 
> I knew nothing about this when I married her, seriously.
> 
> How do I feel about it?
> 
> 
> I guess I don't know, I been staring at that question for a full minute trying to answer it while typing this.
> 
> I'm thinking about it.


Well??

Why is it taking you so long to come up with an answer? You drive me crazy ya know. You have a tendency to leave cliffhangers sitting around. Geez.


----------



## Catherine602

SA I love cooking for my family too. I like to have them sit at the table while I bring the food. My grandmother did the same. She would make sure everyone got a taste of all of the dishes she cooked. Then she would ask "was it good? Are you full already!".

I have since associated feeding people and love.


----------

