# Skill based dominance



## MEM2020

I have noticed that many consider the word “dominance” to be a "dirty" word. I am going to suppress my desire to write a scholarly article as to why that is and instead call on my fellow males to learn to develop and exercise more “skill based” dominance in your lives.

I will start with a definition:
Skill based dominance is the intersection of ability and confidence. It is completely different than “brute force” dominance which is primarily based on aggression, fear and control. Skill based dominance is situational. 

There are instances where I am totally dominant in my marriage. These are situations where my skill level far surpasses my W’s, and I am completely confident that I should be in control of what we do in those cases. That doesn’t mean I act unilaterally. It means I explain my plan ask for input, if I view the input as useful – I use it. 

If however the input is to do something that makes the plan less effective/totally ineffective I briefly explain why and proceed. Where the plan requires my W to actively cooperate I explain what/why I need that cooperation while at the same time making it very clear via tone/body language that I am confident this is the best move. 

Dominant does not mean dictatorial. I don’t order my W around. And I do not discourage questions/refinement. Quite the opposite. I am confident, not arrogant. That said there have been times when I have told her “we can either do this my way or I am washing my hands of this situation completely and you may run with it solo”. 

Note I started all this with “there are instances where I am totally dominant in my marriage”. And there are just as many where my W has a superior skillset/knowledge and she is dominant. And in those situations I actively support her plan and there is no question as to who is in control. If it is something that I have some aptitude for I try to learn from her as we execute. That way next time – maybe I can be more helpful. 

I will close my post with this last thought. 
Skill based dominance is hot. In fact it might be one of the sexiest qualities a person can have. I definitely get turned on when my W exhibits this type behavior and believe it has the same effect on her when I do. 

Dominance is not a dirty word in my house.


----------



## Boker

I agree with a lot of what you say here.

It's true the word "dominance" has a bad connotation. We're brought up to abhor the idea of other people being in control of us; personal freedom and individualism are highly esteemed--or so we're told to believe.

Your description of skill-based dominance includes the idea of respect. Respect is not demanded, it is earned. When one spouse sees the abilities of the other spouse, and that those abilities are superior to their own, the wise thing to do is defer to the spouse with the dominant skill. However, in our individualistic society that promotes the idea of personal freedom, we're taught not to let others tell us what to do. We're taught it isn't manly to let a woman take control of the situation, and women are taught it's degrading to be submissive to a man [I'm trying to use cultural expressions here].

One thing almost every self-made rich person will tell you is that the key to being wealthy is to recognize what you are not good at, and then go out and hire people who are good in those areas. These people become good leaders because they recognize where other people have dominant skills, and they defer to these ones, even though these ones are not the head of the company. The successful businessman still makes the decisions, but only after listening to the advice and suggestions of others. He must know where his ability starts and ends. This takes a lot more humility than we often give them credit for. (Of course, there are the headstrong who just won't listen, but they often can't maintain their empires.) There's also nothing demeaning about an intelligent person working for such a businessman.

It may seem like I'm going to contradict myself here, but it's merely an extension of the foregoing. Men need to build up their skill-sets in family leadership. They need to be responsible providers, calm when dealing with conflict, and focused on the long term. It really isn't much different from being a businessman. We all hate bad bosses, so don't be one. Don't be arrogant, demanding, demeaning, condescending, hostile, bad-tempered, irresponsible, lazy, close-minded, etc. Recognize your abilities and inabilities, as well as those of your wife. Yielding to your wife's strengths will in turn encourage her yield to yours. However, you--as the man--need to build up your skills in family leadership so that she can see you are a responsible person. She will not have respect for you if her abilities trump yours every time. Don't ever suppress or deny her right to exercise her superior skills, as that is where the concept of dominance gets its dirty connotation. To do so would be stubborn. Just make sure you are more responsible and that your decision-making skills are broader and more long-term focused.

My wife makes a good number of the decisions. There are certain areas where she's in control and just I follow her around (this gives me a great opportunity to stare at her a$$). However, when it comes to bigger decisions--ones that are more long-term in focus or involve larger amounts of money--she defers to me. She does this, not simply because I'm a man, but because I've shown myself to be responsible in this area and better able to juggle multiple issues at once and account for others that may arise. These are skills that had to be actively developed, partially through trail and error, partially through reading (news, literature, etc.), and definitely by thinking. It's an active process, one that requires the man to be mature and responsible. Again I'll say it, if she sees that her skills in the maturity and responsibility area are superior, she will not respect you. Seriously, who would?

(Sorry, MEM, if this takes your post in a direction your didn't intend.)


----------



## AFEH

That’s an excellent distinction between dominant and dictatorial.

It’s a very well thought out and articulated post Boker. It’s much how I feel about things.

Bob


----------



## MEM2020

Boker,
You took it forward and said a lot of this better than I did. For the sake of simplicity I think of this as a 2 dimensional matrix. On one axis is emotional intensity: passive, assertive, aggressive. On the other is skill. Low, medium, high. IMO the ideal posture is to keep your skill in synch with your emotional intensity. I cannot stand aggressive people who have no idea what they are talking about. Alternatively it is sad to see a situation where a person has more expertise than anyone else in the room and is too shy/risk averse to stand up and push hard for what they know is the right thing to do. 

Like yours, my definition of "skill" is based on real world experience (including knowing what not to do based on painful lessons learned) and a track record of success in a given area.








Boker said:


> I agree with a lot of what you say here.
> 
> It's true the word "dominance" has a bad connotation. We're brought up to abhor the idea of other people being in control of us; personal freedom and individualism are highly esteemed--or so we're told to believe.
> 
> Your description of skill-based dominance includes the idea of respect. Respect is not demanded, it is earned. When one spouse sees the abilities of the other spouse, and that those abilities are superior to their own, the wise thing to do is defer to the spouse with the dominant skill. However, in our individualistic society that promotes the idea of personal freedom, we're taught not to let others tell us what to do. We're taught it isn't manly to let a woman take control of the situation, and women are taught it's degrading to be submissive to a man [I'm trying to use cultural expressions here].
> 
> One thing almost every self-made rich person will tell you is that the key to being wealthy is to recognize what you are not good at, and then go out and hire people who are good in those areas. These people become good leaders because they recognize where other people have dominant skills, and they defer to these ones, even though these ones are not the head of the company. The successful businessman still makes the decisions, but only after listening to the advice and suggestions of others. He must know where his ability starts and ends. This takes a lot more humility than we often give them credit for. (Of course, there are the headstrong who just won't listen, but they often can't maintain their empires.) There's also nothing demeaning about an intelligent person working for such a businessman.
> 
> It may seem like I'm going to contradict myself here, but it's merely an extension of the foregoing. Men need to build up their skill-sets in family leadership. They need to be responsible providers, calm when dealing with conflict, and focused on the long term. It really isn't much different from being a businessman. We all hate bad bosses, so don't be one. Don't be arrogant, demanding, demeaning, condescending, hostile, bad-tempered, irresponsible, lazy, close-minded, etc. Recognize your abilities and inabilities, as well as those of your wife. Yielding to your wife's strengths will in turn encourage her yield to yours. However, you--as the man--need to build up your skills in family leadership so that she can see you are a responsible person. She will not have respect for you if her abilities trump yours every time. Don't ever suppress or deny her right to exercise her superior skills, as that is where the concept of dominance gets its dirty connotation. To do so would be stubborn. Just make sure you are more responsible and that your decision-making skills are broader and more long-term focused.
> 
> My wife makes a good number of the decisions. There are certain areas where she's in control and just I follow her around (this gives me a great opportunity to stare at her a$$). However, when it comes to bigger decisions--ones that are more long-term in focus or involve larger amounts of money--she defers to me. She does this, not simply because I'm a man, but because I've shown myself to be responsible in this area and better able to juggle multiple issues at once and account for others that may arise. These are skills that had to be actively developed, partially through trail and error, partially through reading (news, literature, etc.), and definitely by thinking. It's an active process, one that requires the man to be mature and responsible. Again I'll say it, if she sees that her skills in the maturity and responsibility area are superior, she will not respect you. Seriously, who would?
> 
> (Sorry, MEM, if this takes your post in a direction your didn't intend.)


----------



## lime

This is such an interesting and accurate idea. Respect is definitely the key ingredient, and it's very interesting that recognizing ones own shortcomings can lead to more respect. One question I had: If you're basing skill on past experience, how do you handle intuition or "light-bulb" moments? Would you listen if your wife said she just had a hunch that you were wrong?

I'm asking because in certain areas, I base a lot of my decisions on gut reactions (my dad does this too; we're both N types according to the Myers-Briggs). Occasionally I'm dead wrong. Usually it leads me to at least observe something new or interesting or useful--about myself or about the situation. I suppose all the mistakes will later add up to experience, but I'm curious as to what to do in the present. My SO tends to be very logical and likes to think things through, while I'm the more impulsive, creative one. A few times he's shot down my ideas when I would have ended up being right...But there have been a lot of times when I've said, "No! I'm sure we should do it this way" and have messed things up. We're also kind of young and still figuring things out (though we'd never want to admit that!)


----------



## MEM2020

Lime,
We have had plenty of moments where she said "trust me on this" and I have. Her intuition based batting average is quite good. Which is why the phrase "trust me" still works. 




lime said:


> This is such an interesting and accurate idea. Respect is definitely the key ingredient, and it's very interesting that recognizing ones own shortcomings can lead to more respect. One question I had: If you're basing skill on past experience, how do you handle intuition or "light-bulb" moments? Would you listen if your wife said she just had a hunch that you were wrong?
> 
> I'm asking because in certain areas, I base a lot of my decisions on gut reactions (my dad does this too; we're both N types according to the Myers-Briggs). Occasionally I'm dead wrong. Usually it leads me to at least observe something new or interesting or useful--about myself or about the situation. I suppose all the mistakes will later add up to experience, but I'm curious as to what to do in the present. My SO tends to be very logical and likes to think things through, while I'm the more impulsive, creative one. A few times he's shot down my ideas when I would have ended up being right...But there have been a lot of times when I've said, "No! I'm sure we should do it this way" and have messed things up. We're also kind of young and still figuring things out (though we'd never want to admit that!)


----------



## Mom6547

MEM11363 said:


> I have noticed that many consider the word “dominance” to be a "dirty" word.


"the state that exists when one person or group has power over another"
Is the definition that comes to mind when I see that word. I don't understand the urge to exert *power* over another.



> I am going to suppress my desire to write a scholarly article as to why that is and instead call on my fellow males to learn to develop and exercise more “skill based” dominance in your lives.
> 
> 
> 
> I will start with a definition:
> Skill based dominance is the intersection of ability and confidence. It is completely different than “brute force” dominance which is primarily based on aggression, fear and control. Skill based dominance is situational.
> 
> There are instances where I am totally dominant in my marriage. These are situations where my skill level far surpasses my W’s, and I am completely confident that I should be in control of what we do in those cases. That doesn’t mean I act unilaterally. It means I explain my plan ask for input, if I view the input as useful – I use it.


That doesn't actually sound much like dominance or power to me. That sounds like democracy to me.



> Dominant does not mean dictatorial. I don’t order my W around. And I do not discourage questions/refinement. Quite the opposite. I am confident, not arrogant. That said there have been times when I have told her “we can either do this my way or I am washing my hands of this situation completely and you may run with it solo”.


Curious. What DO you think it means? I am curious because I bet a lot of "dirty word" business that you experience comes from different basic understanding of the word.




> Note I started all this with “there are instances where I am totally dominant in my marriage”. And there are just as many where my W has a superior skillset/knowledge and she is dominant. And in those situations I actively support her plan and there is no question as to who is in control. If it is something that I have some aptitude for I try to learn from her as we execute. That way next time – maybe I can be more helpful.


If you both agree to this arrangement, I don't see what it has to do with dominance at all.


----------



## Deejo

vthomeschoolmom said:


> "the state that exists when one person or group has power over another"
> Is the definition that comes to mind when I see that word. I don't understand the urge to exert *power* over another.


What about exerting power over oneself? I'd call that growth, how about you?

I am absolutely fine, and at peace with the word.

I have actually addressed the question previously that the discussion about dominance covers a range of terms and behaviors - none of which serve the overall concept better than the word people find offensive.

So, I took a look at synonyms. I think the one I like is 'transcendent'. In my mind that's what I'm working towards, and it sounds overwhelmingly positive, but in the scheme of things a little New Agey.

I recognize that everyone asserts different connotations to the word. Some of them are very negative. My personal definition of dominant?
Be better. Better than those around you expect, and better than you expect of yourself.

Enhancing your own skill sets, belief systems and behaviors. Improving in areas that you are weak. Striving to excel, whether it is in sport, business, or in being a loving, desirable partner.


----------



## Mom6547

Deejo said:


> I recognize that everyone asserts different connotations to the word. Some of them are very negative. My personal definition of dominant?
> Be better. Better than those around you expect, and better than you expect of yourself.


You get to make up your own definition to words!?? Sweet! 

I mean why use a word if you don't mean IT. Why not use the word "better" instead of dominant? 

I am not even super sure what you are saying, so I may be missing your point entirely.

I have seen a number of posters use the word dominant to describe what they expect from men only to back pedal and say they mean confident. So.... why not use the word confident? 

It is an academic point to me though. Interesting conversation.




> Enhancing your own skill sets, belief systems and behaviors. Improving in areas that you are weak. Striving to excel, whether it is in sport, business, or in being a loving, desirable partner.


Good ideas, all.


----------



## Scannerguard

I have no problem with the word dominance.

In fact, Mem, Deejo, and BBW would all agree when it comes to intellect here at TAM, that I dominate the forum.

Yes. . .me alpha dog.


----------



## greenpearl

Scannerguard said:


> I have no problem with the word dominance.
> 
> In fact, Mem, Deejo, and BBW would all agree when it comes to intellect here at TAM, that I dominate the forum.
> 
> Yes. . .me alpha dog.


How come I don't see it often?

Where is your alpha dog? 

I don't see it!


----------



## greenpearl

Some women are so bothered about this man up thing or male dominance thing. 

I am a kind of laughing because they are really missing the fun.

Men taking the lead is good for women, I don't understand why they don't see. 

Wolf is not talking about men being abusive dominant. 

Neither is he talking about irresponsible men.

From his posts, I think he is telling men to gain control of themselves, and become confident of themselves, and then earn their wives' respect, and charm their wives, not by power, not by demanding. 

Women are attracted to men who are confident, responsible, stable, loving. Women love men who are interested in them. 

If a husband is trying very hard to achieve all these skills, it is a good thing, his wife should be happy about it! 

Just remember, a marriage is a life long commitment, we have to be attractive to each other, if we aren't, poo poo happens.


----------



## lime

dom·i·nant
adj.
1. Exercising the most influence or control.
2. Most prominent, as in position; ascendant.
3. Genetics Of, relating to, or being an allele that produces the same phenotypic effect whether inherited with a homozygous or heterozygous allele.
4. Ecology Of, relating to, or being a species that is most characteristic of an ecological community and usually determines the presence, abundance, and type of other species.
5. Music Relating to or based on the fifth tone of a diatonic scale.

I’d say many of the people with positive associations with the word are thinking of definition 2, while those with more negative associations think of definition 1 (I hope no one is thinking of 5….)

VTMom, I understand where you’re coming from, but language can sometimes be more malleable than you give it credit in your last post. I don’t know if we can really assign a “right” or “best” word that appeals to everyone.

Example: “the wind was sour as a coin.”
Can wind be sour? Wind is something that is felt, not tasted. And yet, this "definition" somehow makes perfect sense because it evokes a specific feeling. We can go deeper, asking can coins taste sour? I’ve never tasted one (and I’m not about to now!) but again it creates this chill-inducing feeling of what it would be like to lick a coin. So I think this “definition” of sorts is better than just saying that the wind was harsh, or the wind made us shiver, etc. because it really gets to the specific, exact feeling. There are more layers of meaning involved, so when people say “dominant” and mean “confident,” they might not actually mean confident, but instead a layer of meaning of the word dominant that connotes confident. Wow that was wordy haha. Does that make any sense?


----------



## Deejo

Scannerguard said:


> I have no problem with the word dominance.
> 
> In fact, Mem, Deejo, and BBW would all agree when it comes to intellect here at TAM, that I dominate the forum.
> 
> Yes. . .me alpha dog.


No, no ... you transcend the forum.


----------



## Mom6547

Scannerguard said:


> I have no problem with the word dominance.
> 
> In fact, Mem, Deejo, and BBW would all agree when it comes to intellect here at TAM, that I dominate the forum.
> 
> Yes. . .me alpha dog.


Thumps chest! Woot.


----------



## greenpearl

lime said:


> dom·i·nant
> adj.
> 1. Exercising the most influence or control.
> 2. Most prominent, as in position; ascendant.
> 3. Genetics Of, relating to, or being an allele that produces the same phenotypic effect whether inherited with a homozygous or heterozygous allele.
> 4. Ecology Of, relating to, or being a species that is most characteristic of an ecological community and usually determines the presence, abundance, and type of other species.
> 5. Music Relating to or based on the fifth tone of a diatonic scale.
> 
> I’d say many of the people with positive associations with the word are thinking of definition 2, while those with more negative associations think of definition 1 (I hope no one is thinking of 5….)
> 
> VTMom, I understand where you’re coming from, but language can sometimes be more malleable than you give it credit in your last post. I don’t know if we can really assign a “right” or “best” word that appeals to everyone.
> 
> Example: “the wind was sour as a coin.”
> Can wind be sour? Wind is something that is felt, not tasted. And yet, this "definition" somehow makes perfect sense because it evokes a specific feeling. We can go deeper, asking can coins taste sour? I’ve never tasted one (and I’m not about to now!) but again it creates this chill-inducing feeling of what it would be like to lick a coin. So I think this “definition” of sorts is better than just saying that the wind was harsh, or the wind made us shiver, etc. because it really gets to the specific, exact feeling. There are more layers of meaning involved, so when people say “dominant” and mean “confident,” they might not actually mean confident, but instead a layer of meaning of the word dominant that connotes confident. Wow that was wordy haha. Does that make any sense?


Lime,

It makes sense to me!

This word means LOVE to me!

Lime, Boker is my husband, he shows up here when I ask him to. It means he seldom comes here.


----------



## Mom6547

greenpearl said:


> Some women are so bothered about this man up thing or male dominance thing.
> 
> I am a kind of laughing because they are really missing the fun.
> 
> Men taking the lead is good for women, I don't understand why they don't see.


This is a common mental issue to see ONE experience as the only experience. You may forget that there is nothing for some of us to "see." In my world there is no male dominance. There is neither female dominance. There is nothing but joy! That YOU have found happiness in the model that you espouse is lovely. That does not a universal truth make.


snip a bunch of word definition issues


----------



## Mom6547

Deejo said:


> What about exerting power over oneself? I'd call that growth, how about you?


Missed the direct question. I like those. To answer, yes I agree completely.


----------



## Mom6547

lime said:


> dom·i·nant
> adj.
> 1. Exercising the most influence or control.
> 2. Most prominent, as in position; ascendant.
> 3. Genetics Of, relating to, or being an allele that produces the same phenotypic effect whether inherited with a homozygous or heterozygous allele.
> 4. Ecology Of, relating to, or being a species that is most characteristic of an ecological community and usually determines the presence, abundance, and type of other species.
> 5. Music Relating to or based on the fifth tone of a diatonic scale.
> 
> I’d say many of the people with positive associations with the word are thinking of definition 2, while those with more negative associations think of definition 1 (I hope no one is thinking of 5….)
> 
> VTMom, I understand where you’re coming from, but language can sometimes be more malleable than you give it credit in your last post. I don’t know if we can really assign a “right” or “best” word that appeals to everyone.


Indeed it can. Thus the threads about dominance. My son and I are working on shades of meaning in language arts lessons lately. Talking about choosing the word or words that best give across your meaning. I think there is a shade of meaning to dominance that is not the same as confidence or influence that leans more toward CONTROL and POWER. I think that is why it is used and why it is objected to.




> Example: “the wind was sour as a coin.”
> Can wind be sour? Wind is something that is felt, not tasted.


I don't think anyone has used the word dominant metaphorically as yet.



> And yet, this "definition" somehow makes perfect sense because it evokes a specific feeling. We can go deeper, asking can coins taste sour? I’ve never tasted one (and I’m not about to now!)


I would advise against it. In my experience if you accidentally swallow it, it is not much fun to pass through the other end.



> There are more layers of meaning involved, so when people say “dominant” and mean “confident,” they might not actually mean confident, but instead a layer of meaning of the word dominant that connotes confident. Wow that was wordy haha. Does that make any sense?


Yup. The only thing is I think they actually mean power and control and hide behind confident because it sounds nice.Could be wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.


----------



## Deejo

vthomeschoolmom said:


> You get to make up your own definition to words!?? Sweet!


Nah, who am I kidding. I'm down with exerting influence and control. Please note that you will _never_ find a definition that distinctly describes or ascribes the specifics of how influence and control are achieved. Violence and subjugation needn't be the only means to the end - and I'll state it yet again; nobody here advocates being violent towards or subjugating women.




> I have seen a number of posters use the word dominant to describe what they expect from men only to back pedal and say they mean confident. So.... why not use the word confident?


Because there have been any number of efforts to make the content more palatable, and easy to discuss.

However, those efforts always fall short ... so we stick with dominant and let everyone wrestle with their own definition demons.


----------



## Mom6547

Deejo said:


> Nah, who am I kidding. I'm down with exerting influence and control. Please note that you will _never_ find a definition that distinctly describes or ascribes the specifics of how influence and control are achieved. Violence and subjugation needn't be the only means to the end - and I'll state it yet again; nobody here advocates being violent towards or subjugating women.


I was joking about the making up definition thing, for the record.

I am really struggling to try and understand what you are saying. My filters are applied to your words and make me think you are saying something that I really don't think I am understanding properly.

Obviously no one is suggesting violence. AFAIC we can strike that from the conversation as a non-point.

You talk earlier about SELF control and SELF influence. We all seek to achieve that as part of being a grown up. What I don't understand is whether or not you advocate that male will supersedes female will by nature of your gender.

Honestly the more I hear the less I object. The only thing that tickles me is the gender thing. What exactly DO you feel that men are that women aren't in the control and influence department?

I am not trying to pick a fight. I realize that my sense of humor does not come across in text. I am genuinely curious.



> Because there have been any number of efforts to make the content more palatable, and easy to discuss.


Well I am denser than average. I am still working on understanding. 



> However, those efforts always fall short ... so we stick with dominant and let everyone wrestle with their own definition demons.


ah ah. I may be less far behind than I thought.


----------



## MEM2020

Lime,
You are beginning to dominate this thread via use of fact, reason and logic enhanced by a light sprinkling of poetic license. 

VT,
I DO exercise a disproportionate amount of power in group situations at work every day. Meaning that my influence exceeds my percentage of the body count. If there are 5 of us, I might contribute 30% - or in an extreme case more than 50%. 

Sometimes that exercise of power is focused on getting shy, reserved or junior colleagues to speak up because I know they have something valuable to add. Sometimes it is by being the "bouncer" when more aggressive colleagues are seeking to control the outcome by using an inappropriate level of emotional intensity. Done properly no one in the room ever thinks of me as "aggressive" or overbearing. I believe this is what Atholk calls "social dominance". 

If all of our meetings were truly democratic everyone would have an equal vote. That works very badly because in most meetings there is a big spread between the most and least knowledgeable people. 

As for the "democracy" of my marriage it isn't really like a democracy in situations where on of us is really skilled and the other is not. We don't "vote" in those cases. Instead it is understood to be a context in which "participative dictatorship" is the most effective structure. The "second" in those cases gets to participate but understands that the "prime" is going to make the call. Works well for us. 



lime said:


> dom·i·nant
> adj.
> 1. Exercising the most influence or control.
> 2. Most prominent, as in position; ascendant.
> 3. Genetics Of, relating to, or being an allele that produces the same phenotypic effect whether inherited with a homozygous or heterozygous allele.
> 4. Ecology Of, relating to, or being a species that is most characteristic of an ecological community and usually determines the presence, abundance, and type of other species.
> 5. Music Relating to or based on the fifth tone of a diatonic scale.
> 
> I’d say many of the people with positive associations with the word are thinking of definition 2, while those with more negative associations think of definition 1 (I hope no one is thinking of 5….)
> 
> VTMom, I understand where you’re coming from, but language can sometimes be more malleable than you give it credit in your last post. I don’t know if we can really assign a “right” or “best” word that appeals to everyone.
> 
> Example: “the wind was sour as a coin.”
> Can wind be sour? Wind is something that is felt, not tasted. And yet, this "definition" somehow makes perfect sense because it evokes a specific feeling. We can go deeper, asking can coins taste sour? I’ve never tasted one (and I’m not about to now!) but again it creates this chill-inducing feeling of what it would be like to lick a coin. So I think this “definition” of sorts is better than just saying that the wind was harsh, or the wind made us shiver, etc. because it really gets to the specific, exact feeling. There are more layers of meaning involved, so when people say “dominant” and mean “confident,” they might not actually mean confident, but instead a layer of meaning of the word dominant that connotes confident. Wow that was wordy haha. Does that make any sense?


----------



## MEM2020

GP,
You have EXCEPTIONAL taste. I really like Boker's posts. That is so cool that he is your H. You two deserve each other, you are both delightful.




greenpearl said:


> Lime,
> 
> It makes sense to me!
> 
> This word means LOVE to me!
> 
> Lime, Boker is my husband, he shows up here when I ask him to. It means he seldom comes here.


----------



## greenpearl

MEM11363 said:


> GP,
> You have EXCEPTIONAL taste. I really like Boker's posts. That is so cool that he is your H. You two deserve each other, you are both delightful.


Thank you, MEM!

  

I really thank myself for being bold asking him for his number and making the right decision to turn down the other rich man. 

I can't tell you how much I am happy with my life. 

I can only tell you now I am happy with being a woman and a human, and I want to live as long as I am able to!


----------



## Mom6547

MEM11363 said:


> Lime,
> You are beginning to dominate this thread via use of fact, reason and logic enhanced by a light sprinkling of poetic license.
> 
> VT,
> I DO exercise a disproportionate amount of power in group situations at work every day. Meaning that my influence exceeds my percentage of the body count. If there are 5 of us, I might contribute 30% - or in an extreme case more than 50%.
> 
> Sometimes that exercise of power is focused on getting shy, reserved or junior colleagues to speak up because I know they have something valuable to add. Sometimes it is by being the "bouncer" when more aggressive colleagues are seeking to control the outcome by using an inappropriate level of emotional intensity. Done properly no one in the room ever thinks of me as "aggressive" or overbearing. I believe this is what Atholk calls "social dominance".


That someone somewhere sometimes exerts control and/or influence is no mystery to me. I agree that what you say is appropriate and necessary. 

I do not share whatever tendency there has been on these threads to equate dominance with aggression or overbearing-ness. (I love making up words!)




> If all of our meetings were truly democratic everyone would have an equal vote. That works very badly because in most meetings there is a big spread between the most and least knowledgeable people.
> 
> As for the "democracy" of my marriage it isn't really like a democracy in situations where on of us is really skilled and the other is not. We don't "vote" in those cases. Instead it is understood to be a context in which "participative dictatorship" is the most effective structure. The "second" in those cases gets to participate but understands that the "prime" is going to make the call. Works well for us.


Well if that is dominance then I have no objection to it. That is a mild use of the word control I have substituted in for the sake of attempting to increase understanding. Get 'er done works too!

The thing about the dominance conversations that go on here is that I don't think even people who think that they are agreeing are together on what they think that they agree on. What you describe does not sound like MALE dominance to me at all. 

When I think of male dominance I think of my in-laws relationship. It would be best described as a benevolent dictatorship. HE decides what is to be and what isn't. She speaks and opines. But she has no actual will in the relationship. She has some sneaky backhanded tools to use when she really wants something. But he half times just ignores and does whatever HE thinks is right. It does seem to work for them since she does not expect any different.. But even though he is TRYING to be benevolent, he is no god. He misses the boat. I don't think that kind of relationship is a model that everyone or even most would be happy with.


----------



## Conrad

VT,

It's clear that you are completely stuck in some stereotypical straw man fantasy about what MEM, Wolf, and the rest are talking about.

Your last paragraph confirms it.

If one reads for content, they see that these gentlemen mean nothing of that kind.

But, if fighting "patriarchy" and enforcing political correctness is the ultimate goal - then carry on.

I now see why Wolf limits his posts to constructive discussions.

I think we ought to re-name the "Men's Clubhouse" the "Hen House".


----------



## Trenton

Conrad said:


> VT,
> 
> It's clear that you are completely stuck in some stereotypical straw man fantasy about what MEM, Wolf, and the rest are talking about.
> 
> Your last paragraph confirms it.
> 
> If one reads for content, they see that these gentlemen mean nothing of that kind.
> 
> But, if fighting "patriarchy" and enforcing political correctness is the ultimate goal - then carry on.
> 
> I now see why Wolf limits his posts to constructive discussions.
> 
> I think we ought to re-name the "Men's Clubhouse" the "Hen House".


Conrad, it obvious that you are a controlling man who is angry at women. You want to own a woman and have her do your bidding and feel this is the natural order of things. People ask advice and you direct them to Man Up threads repeatedly and that is all you do. You seem to have nothing constructive to say and leave half butted, one liners that are hallow in meaning although I imagine you believe they are so very deep. I wonder how is this working for you in your relationship? All your anger, resentment and your firm belief that your way is the only way? I have a hard time believing you were ever much of a "nice guy".


----------



## Mom6547

Conrad said:


> VT,
> 
> It's clear that you are completely stuck in some stereotypical straw man fantasy about what MEM, Wolf, and the rest are talking about.
> 
> Your last paragraph confirms it.
> 
> If one reads for content, they see that these gentlemen mean nothing of that kind.


But, if fighting "patriarchy" and enforcing political correctness is the ultimate goal - then carry on.
[/quote]

You know you could read me for comprehension. That would be unique from you. 

My whole thing is to understand why the term "male dominance" is used to describe what basically amounts to confidence. Why do they chose "male dominance?" For the record, I am not convinced that MEM and Wolf mean the same thing at all.

Patriarchy doesn't exist in my world. I have no reason to challenge it.


----------



## Trenton

NoLongerSad, thank you for saying what I would say if I were as logical and articulate as you. I couldn't agree more.


----------



## Mom6547

NoLongerSad, you hit on my question that no one has yet answered. As a matter of WILL do proponents of this dominance feel that man's will should supersede that of the woman? That would clarify a lot for me.


----------



## Deejo

NoLongerSad said:


> I can think of very few issues which could come up in my relationship, which are more important to me than the preservation of the relationship itself.


Excellent attitude. Please do tell about your relationship rather than word-smithing around what others have to say about theirs.

Button is right on the upper left called <New Thread>. Looking forward to learning about you and your marriage. Thanks.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Deejo,
For some reason your avi looks like a cross to me between Oscar the Grouch and Cookie Monster. He looks furry. Maybe it's the Captain Morgan/meds talking though. LOL.


----------



## Mom6547

I don't understand you, Deejo. I have said this yet you don't seem inclined to help me out.

Seems to me that some folk have asserted that there is something useful about males being dominant in their marriages. Even that women want that. But then ... I don't understand what that MEANS. If it means confident, then great yes. I think most people would would prefer a mate that is confident. But what does that have to do with men? And what does it have to do with dominance?

I wonder if there is a way for a poster to hide their posts. I can't see BBW's posts unless someone else quotes them. He probably attempts to explain it somewhere, but I can't see it.

You seem to be irritated that someone might want to understand someone else's meaning.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

VT,
Sorry, how does he sound irritated? I don't see that implication at all. He is saying that rather than quote others, post his own story in a new thread. Am I missing something here?


----------



## Mom6547

"rather than wordsmithing around what others have to say about theirs."


----------



## Trenton

Much of what I get from BBW is dominance in the bedroom. I agree but for different reasons. In the other thread I just had a realization that in many of these "niceguy" marriages it's possible the woman lacks desire for sex.

I can't speak for BBW but I think his philosophy might somehow provide a spark that recreates this desire in women, women who really have no idea as to why they don't have a desire for sex with their husband. If this is the case, then no amount of chores the man does will spark the woman's fire. BBW's philosophy would work because it's possible the new excitement found through dominant/submissive sex works to spark a woman's desires. The change in the woman's man might allow her to reconnect and feel differently.

Even so, other behaviors might also work. It would still depend on the woman. Knowing and studying the woman and allowing her the freedom to feel her passions would always work if a lack of passionate desire is the problem, but men might not know how to begin to do this. I'm not sure I would know how to do this. BBW might supply a type of road map to doing this. 

The problem is I see where the flaw is in the philosophy. It seeks to destroy the positives of the "niceguy" and swing the pendulum of the relationship too far in the opposite direction. It discounts the woman possibly because it is male defined.

When I think about this it makes sense for me because sex is the one thing that's never been a problem in my relationship. I have to keep asking myself why. What is the difference in my relationship as I do see my husband as a nice guy. I know he is a nice guy but he has always successfully fueled my passions, showed a continued interest in knowing me, in my personal happiness and well being.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If a philosophy only works from the male perspective and includes male behaviors to manipulate female behaviors it falls short of creating an honest, intimate relationship.

If men and women could work together to create a universal philosophy that addressed both it would be a tremendous positive.

It's like Einstein's theories, he was searching for a unified theory to connect two theories but never did it successfully. It is impossible to find something if we do not know where to look for it. Leave out one aspect accidentally or in ignorance and it will always elude you.


----------



## Conrad

Trenton,

The more you post, the more I realize your man already knows the stuff BBW is speaking about.

Why you would try to argue down the chance of other women to experience it is beyond me.


----------



## Conrad

vthomeschoolmom said:


> I don't understand you, Deejo. I have said this yet you don't seem inclined to help me out.
> 
> Seems to me that some folk have asserted that there is something useful about males being dominant in their marriages. Even that women want that. But then ... I don't understand what that MEANS. If it means confident, then great yes. I think most people would would prefer a mate that is confident. But what does that have to do with men? And what does it have to do with dominance?
> 
> I wonder if there is a way for a poster to hide their posts. I can't see BBW's posts unless someone else quotes them. He probably attempts to explain it somewhere, but I can't see it.
> 
> You seem to be irritated that someone might want to understand someone else's meaning.


I think he's more irritated that people don't wish to understand.


----------



## Mom6547

Trenton said:


> Much of what I get from BBW is dominance in the bedroom. I agree but for different reasons. In the other thread I just had a realization that in many of these "niceguy" marriages it's possible the woman lacks desire for sex.


If by "nice guy" one means oh baby PLEAAASEEE can I have sex, pretty please with katsup on top. Then yah that is not super attractive I wouldn't think.




> I can't speak for BBW but I think his philosophy might somehow provide a spark that recreates this desire in women, women who really have no idea as to why they don't have a desire for sex with their husband. If this is the case, then no amount of chores the man does will spark the woman's fire.


I would think that both could be at play. DH never even got to make any sexual progress toward me back in the bad old days when I felt he was a slacker. He could not have been dominant in the "bedroom" or sex department because we got no where near there.






> BBW's philosophy would work because it's possible the new excitement found through dominant/submissive sex works to spark a woman's desires. The change in the woman's man might allow her to reconnect and feel differently.
> 
> Even so, other behaviors might also work. It would still depend on the woman.


Bingo, must be the front row.

It would also depend on the man. Totally not my thing, but I know a couple in which the man is a total sub. Like begging, the whole dom/sub works. So pleaaaase baby can I have sex, pretty please works for them, apparently.

It is because of the vast difference in people's attitudes that I guess I am so dubious of the usefulness of the men like this and women like that business.... Ah well.





> Knowing and studying the woman and allowing her the freedom to feel her passions would always work if a lack of passionate desire is the problem, but men might not know how to begin to do this. I'm not sure I would know how to do this. BBW might supply a type of road map to doing this.


I can't see what he posts so I can't comment.





> I've said it before and I'll say it again. If a philosophy only works from the male perspective and includes male behaviors to manipulate female behaviors it falls short of creating an honest, intimate relationship.


Seems to me.


----------



## Deejo

Here's the thing ...

the 'meaning' is going to be vastly different to each listener.

BBW has coalesced his 'meaning' into a few sentences. "Sexual structure is maintained when a man strives to dominate, and a woman strives to be dominated."
Maintaining harmony based upon sexual desire is the simple core of what he says. Presuming that both husbands and wives want to desire one another, how bad can it be? But invariably, somebody always freaks out about his suggestions to facilitate the meaning. 

What I take from MEM's meaning is using alpha and beta characteristics, both verbal and nonverbal to facilitate conflict resolution, _to the satisfaction of both partners_. He calls it 'Emotional Symmetry' 

Athol shares gaming techniques and again stresses the notion of sliding up along a scale of alpha and beta behavior to best serve a long term relationship such as a marriage.

They are all slightly different. They all have one goal:
Behave in a such a way that the woman in your life consistently finds you intimately appealing and sexually interesting.

Yet continuously, and I have no delusions that this post will make so much as a dent ... women challenge and rail against the concepts which men who have either lost, or have been betrayed by their partner are trying to explore and decide if it works for them.

For some it works incredibly. It's life altering. For others not so much. So like with many things, your mileage may vary - but what is said and how it is applied still doesn't change the goal.

But, as for an analogy there is little place for arguing that the horse-drawn carriage is superior to the automobile. It simply doesn't apply. And it applies even less if the participants in the argument are Pennsylvania Dutch Amish and Metropolitan Suburbanite. Both are a means of conveyance.

*Self Edit*
I invoke the names of BBW, MEM and Athol because they have been the primary drivers behind suggesting that men in failing or sex starved relationships need to do some emotional and behavioral housekeeping. But these concepts and the goal? Don't belong to them. The ideas aren't theirs. You can find the ideas in any number of books, online articles or seminars. The concepts are based in biology, psychology, and marketing. So none of this is so much about defending the dudes. The dudes need and specifically ask for no defense. If women 'get it' then hell, they can help work on the goal. If they don't? That's fine, if you are in a happy, horny, relationship odds are one of the partners does even if both are completely oblivious of the concepts.

My goal has been to explore what works. I am very familiar with what doesn't.


----------



## Trenton

You can't see his posts? Damn. He is an alpha male. :rofl:


----------



## Mom6547

Deejo said:


> Here's the thing ...
> 
> the 'meaning' is going to be vastly different to each listener.
> 
> BBW has coalesced his 'meaning' into a few sentences. "Sexual structure is maintained when a man strives to dominate, and a woman strives to be dominated."


Oh. Well that is easy enough. I just don't agree that this is universal truth. That is definitely in the YMMV catagory as far as I can see. I have seen too many people with different outlooks than that in my jaded past to be able to agree. As long as the people for whom it works wind up together, all is well.




> Maintaining harmony based upon sexual desire is the simple core of what he says. Presuming that both husbands and wives want to desire one another, how bad can it be? But invariably, somebody always freaks out about his suggestions to facilitate the meaning.


Well I appreciate your willingness to recap. Don't agree with him. How much is THAT a huge surprise?!? But I will bet he won't lose any sleep over that.



> They are all slightly different. They all have one goal:
> Behave in a such a way that the woman in your life consistently finds you intimately appealing and sexually interesting.
> 
> Yet continuously, and I have no delusions that this post will make so much as a dent ... women challenge and rail against the concepts which men who have either lost, or have been betrayed by their partner are trying to explore and decide if it works for them.


Ah. Well if I felt like that, I would be irritated too. I think the exploration of what would work for any individual is a good thing! Self awareness never hurts.

My personal bias is to look on some of the posters here and see that process as nothing more than absolving themselves from whatever their role might have been. I don't know your story at all so I am not thinking of you. But it seems to me that my bias misses the point of what the conversation is really about. 

I think there is also a dash of color of meaning of the terms that alights fires.




> For some it works incredibly. It's life altering. For others not so much. So like with many things, your mileage may vary - but what is said and how it is applied still doesn't change the goal.


I guess I would not chose your goal if I understand you correctly. If my husband chose as his first goal to seek to behave such that I desire him, that would seem like a secondary goal. Kinda of the awesome gravy that tops us in our main goal of a mentally healthy, respectful, partnership of love together forever and family building. I guess I see the my main goal, the latter as the necessary precursor to the former. Maybe you see the former as the necessary precursor to the latter? Perhaps it doesn't matter so much as long as they both are there? I don't know.

By no means am I telling you how to set your goals. Just voicing my own PoV for what it is worth.




> But, as for an analogy there is little place for arguing that the horse-drawn carriage is superior to the automobile. It simply doesn't apply. And it applies even less if the participants in the argument are Pennsylvania Dutch Amish and Metropolitan Suburbanite. Both are a means of conveyance.


I have no earthly idea what that analogy means!

Thanks for the explanation. For my part, I don't object to one's finding one's way. I DO object to absolute language that tries to box me by gender in a box in which I don't fit. For MY part THAT is why I object to men are and women are, and men like and women like statements. Deejo should certainly find the love style that works for YOU. And you and BBW should, of course, continue to offer this as a possible successful love style. I will probably continue to offer counterpoint thoughts. I was about to say if that is ok with you. But dang I don't think I coudl stop myself if I wanted to!

Cheers.


----------



## Deejo

NoLongerSad said:


> I might but I don't really feel like starting my own thread.
> 
> The reason I quoted you, is because your comment as quoted is an excellent example of a deliberate attempt to assert "dominance" (verbally obviously) which is completely ineffectual since you lack any actual ability to control another poster's opinions or actions. So it's a purely symbolic effort on your part to broadcast a message such as: "Look at me, I'm dominant, I will now tell someone else what to do."
> 
> I think this manner of thinking, on your part, is clearly off track, but it goes to the heart of what doesn't make a whole lot of sense about many of the opinions and attitudes expressed in a "male dominance" discussion.
> 
> If a man and a woman are in a consensual relationship--and I pretty much all think we're taking that for granted, we're not talking about non-consensual relationships--then it is simply not possible for one party to be truly dominant over the other party in quite the way that some posters are trying to suggest should be regarded as an "ideal."


Okay?

Thought you might have something to say other than, I'm misguided. But, 'I'm misguided' is cool. I like the discussion being about me. That way I command your attention.


----------



## Deejo

This may seem like lunacy, but I'm actually going to try and steer the thread back on topic.

I'm going to go back to cooking.

I have mad kitchen skillz. I have absolutely used this skill set to foster attraction. And yes, the ladies are universally appreciative and impressed.

Until ...

Until it becomes an LTR, and as pertains to cooking, I almost feel like it becomes a liability. My ex was flat out intimidated, and basically saw no reason to even try to become an accomplished cook because she already had one in her new 'he-b!tch' whom decided that he wanted to spend his life with her.

MEM, I may need to reread your initial post, but I was thinking of this in terms of something similar on Athol's blog along the lines of "Get really good at something to be more appealing".

GF made me dinner last night, and it was basic, but damn good. She must have apologized a half dozen times in deference of her perception that she can't cook and I can.


----------



## Conrad

Humor is actually a sign of intelligence.


----------



## MEM2020

VT,
OK - I am beginning to understand. I only pair the words "male" and "dominance" in a sexual context and even then I am very clear about what I mean. FWIW I would never force myself on any woman - most especially on the person I love most. Dominance <> forced sex/rape. More on that below. OTHER than in a narrow sexual context I don't say "male dominance". My use of the word is gender neutral. 

Once I listed all the stuff my W controls "has the final say on", the things I control and the 50-50 stuff. Outside the bedroom she controls way more than I do. Inside the bedroom I control way more or at least she has created that illusion:
- I have a large degree of control over frequency. This is the ONLY place in our marriage where she generally accepts me as the prime purely based on my being male. Just talking about frequency here. 
- She wants/needs me to have an aggressive, dominant sexual style. When the female demands male alpha behavior it becomes utterly impossible to say who is really driving the ship. 

As for your in-laws. Yuck. I actually think those type marriages are rapidly being replaced by the opposite situation. More on that in another thread. 

As for confidence - it means nothing to me in isolation. I have seen WAY too much false confidence in people. 




vthomeschoolmom said:


> That someone somewhere sometimes exerts control and/or influence is no mystery to me. I agree that what you say is appropriate and necessary.
> 
> I do not share whatever tendency there has been on these threads to equate dominance with aggression or overbearing-ness. (I love making up words!)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well if that is dominance then I have no objection to it. That is a mild use of the word control I have substituted in for the sake of attempting to increase understanding. Get 'er done works too!
> 
> The thing about the dominance conversations that go on here is that I don't think even people who think that they are agreeing are together on what they think that they agree on. What you describe does not sound like MALE dominance to me at all.
> 
> When I think of male dominance I think of my in-laws relationship. It would be best described as a benevolent dictatorship. HE decides what is to be and what isn't. She speaks and opines. But she has no actual will in the relationship. She has some sneaky backhanded tools to use when she really wants something. But he half times just ignores and does whatever HE thinks is right. It does seem to work for them since she does not expect any different.. But even though he is TRYING to be benevolent, he is no god. He misses the boat. I don't think that kind of relationship is a model that everyone or even most would be happy with.


----------



## MEM2020

Nolongersad,
"Technically speaking" you did a fairly good job critiquing my earlier post. I will respond shortly. In the meantime I will just observe that you have a constant refrain in your posts:
- If I am not very careful to avoid upsetting my W she will cut off sex. So I need to be VERY careful not to upset her. 

Statistically you will find that approach almost guarantees the eventual creation of a sexless marriage. 

- Even if she is overspending I need to persuade her to be more responsible if I can. Because it is better to live beyond our means then it is to make her question whether I am validating her feelings. 

- Peace at any price is better than risking the relationship for whatever reason. 

- And best of all you said that - ALL decisions in marriage are 50-50. Hmm clearly you have had some/many situations where you have been TOTALLY shut down in bed. So was your YES vote to have sex all those nights equal to her NO vote not to? Being that you like precision I will tell you what a true 50-50 really means sexually. It means that if you want to every day - at most she gets to say no half the time. That is the 50-50 compromise. Thing is you come across as the guy who was getting ZERO, perhaps still is getting very little and are terrified that an argument might give her an excuse to take you right back to the land of masturbation. 





NoLongerSad said:


> I can think of very few issues which could come up in my relationship, which are more important to me than the preservation of the relationship itself.
> 
> We all get caught up in the day to day stuff but I feel that the best way of dealing with this interpersonal stuff is to always be mindful of the "relationship management" aspects of whatever the issue is.
> 
> Example: If we are having a dispute over the family budget, I don't want to be in a position of imposing my will on my spouse just because I might happen to have more literal control over the money (if I am the primary wage earner for example). Yes I could always IMPOSE a spending restriction on my spouse if I have the literal power to do so (the "total financial dominance"). However--I would greatly prefer it if I am able to persuade my spouse of the importance of not spending so much money to the point where she buys into that notion and then it is not necessary for me to impose anything, make ultimatums, restrictions...
> 
> Or else she might end up "complying" because she has to comply, but inside she's thinking "That cheap so-and-so...."


----------



## Trenton

Mem, I genuinely like you but I can't get over the prostitute thing. It sucks.


----------



## MEM2020

T,
I am genuinely curious as to why that is. Is it the:
- "disease" factor, 
- the speed with which I reacted or
- some question of my commitment level 





Trenton said:


> Mem, I genuinely like you but I can't get over the prostitute thing. It sucks.


----------



## Trenton

MEM11363 said:


> T,
> I am genuinely curious as to why that is. Is it the:
> - "disease" factor,
> - the speed with which I reacted or
> - some question of my commitment level


I didn't even think of disease. It's the hurt level it must have caused. I can accept you were being honest but it would absolutely crush me if my husband said that to me at any point in our lives. I did talk to him about it. Drilled him with 20 questions and different scenarios. Of course, he had the right answers as he's not facing it right now and had to know that the wrong answer would lead to me being upset so it was really stupid of me. 

I think what bothers me is the truth in it all. I want to hope that it's just you and make you the bad guy but I worry that it's not just you but that you're just honest. I'm realizing that sex, for men, is so tied to their happiness in a relationship and it scares me. Honestly, it makes me want to go it alone and this bothers me too.


----------



## MEM2020

NLS,
skill based dominance does not equal technical competence. Technical competence = skill. No more, no less. 

Skill based dominance is the alignment of your skill level and your emotional intensity. That intensity should first and foremost manifest itself as confidence. True confidence is not defensive or thin skinned. When challenged your skill/knowledge combined with confidence/assertiveness and when needed aggressiveness should persuade your partner/partners. When it doesn't sometimes you need to break some emotional glass to get to a good outcome. This is way more than "technical competence". 

As for "total dominance" and the lack of it due to the divorce option - I agree with you. Statement retracted. 

You mention leveraging skill in a particular area to dominate the whole relationship. You seemed to have missed the bit - maybe it was a subsequent post - where I specifically stated that my W and I each dominate in our respective areas of competence/excellence. 

I was amused by your depiction of: "I will wash my hands of this and you can take over" being a "small nuke". More so with the possible consequence that will have my mating rights revoked. When I have a good/great track record in an area and my W aggressively interjects herself into the situation and suggests a path I am confident is wrong - I do offer to wash my hands. 

I don't yell or scream. I simply refuse to participate in a bad approach. I don't do it often but it has worked well for me in the past. Funny thing is - I have also had it done to me. It certainly didn't change my sexual desire for the person doing it. I took it as their sincere belief they knew what they were doing. And that combined with their obvious skill level caused me to ease up. And they proceeded to produce a good outcome. 

I hope for your sake you are with a woman who likes sex, and also likes a conflict avoidant male. 



NoLongerSad said:


> I consider it to be a contextual, relative and subjective word. Something is "dominant" only in relation to something else, which is "subordinate" to the "dominant" object. I can be "dominant" in one context or with certain people and "subordinate" in other contexts or with other people, or both. I can be both "dominant" and "subordinate" at the same time, with the same person.
> 
> In most day to day situations I am uncomfortable with vague, highly subjective terminology like "dominant" and "subordinate" because it's so easy for each person to define what these kinds of terms means so differently. You end up talking about completely different things and not communicating very well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You needn't write a learned treatise but you are obligated to actually at least define what you mean by the term "dominant" and when you believe it is appropriately used. You skipped over the essential part--defining your terms.
> 
> "Skill based dominance" strikes me as another way of saying "technically competent." The problem with "technical competence" is that it may simply equate to being "a nerd" in whatever the area of competence might be. "Nerds" are not generally considered to be "generally" or "sexually" dominant, although if their nerdiness is sufficient that they can acquire significant financial assets, it can make up for a lot of deficiencies in other areas.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's not an adequate definition. Yes I think we all understand that it can be beneficial to be good at a particular task or skill, such as computer programming, or carpentry, or baking cupcakes. So what? How does that "translate" into "sexual" or "emotional" or "intrapersonal" dominance?
> 
> If the particular task at which you are dominant is not inherently "sexy," who really cares that a person has a particular skill? Most of us have things we are good at, but that doesn't mean anyone else has to care more about us as a person, just because we are good at performance of a particular type of task.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Brute force" dominance must be your way of saying "physical/emotional strength"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most likely it would be more correct to say that there are instances where you believe you are totally dominant in your marriage; or where you are mostly dominant in your marriage. However in any marriage the dominance of one person cannot truly be "total" because the other person always has the nuclear option of just leaving or divorcing as a response to a potentially deal-breaking exercise of supposedly "total" dominance in one area or another. Or alternatively the other person can always "let you win the argument" and then take it out of your hide in some way further down the road. Realistically that's what happens in most relationships. If one or the other person "wins" in one context, but overplays their leverage, they are going to pay for it in some way down the road. Not necessarily by divorce or anything that drastic. However if I presumptuously impose a decision on my partner because I think I'm "dominant" and he or she resents that, then that will build a certain lingering level of resentment or unhappiness that is going to result in blowback to me over time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's fine but in any two person scenario even if you are totally taking the lead on an issue, you still have to at least get consent/acquiesence/buy-in by the other person. I assume you are not talking about totally trivial stuff such as what color should the air freshener in the family car should be, but rather, important marital stuff. The objective should always be to get buy-in/consensus/mutuality. I think you are just kidding yourself if you try to leverage your dominance in a particular skill set over the entire relationship, the payback on the back end is a real "rhymes with witch."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes but you still have to get buy-in/consensus from the other person/spouse. Just because you are good at something let's say deciding which family car to buy, doesn't mean your spouse doesn't have what amounts to a "veto" power over your decision making. No the "veto" might not manifest itself in that particular area of choice, simply because (stop and think about this for a second) why would your spouse choose to exercise her veto power in an area of the relationship in which you have the maximum technical skill? She won't do that. She will let you exercise your leverage in the area where you have strength, and then she will try to find an area to "get you back" by exercising her leverage in an area in which she has relative dominance. (For a lot of men this generally means that no matter what the actual issue is it will end up causing problems in the bedroom or the emotional environment of the marriage because that's where for most couples the woman has more leverage than the man. So let's say you pick out a Prius but your wife really wanted a Lexus but since you know more about cars you exercise total dominance. Sure she might "agree" to your choice of automobile, pretend she's happy with it, and then two weeks later she is denying you sex because "You don't love me anymore!" or something like that...)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you can't just explain or lecture in these situations (although most men probably have a similar tendency). You have to discuss the process sufficiently to where you get actual buy-in/consensus. Or else what you're doing is "winning" that particular issue, but you're going to end up damaging the overall emotional context of your relationship.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let me rephrase, you need to have the power of persuasion. It doesn't matter how smart you are or how skillful you are or how dominant you are. A modern marriage consists of a relationship in which each person has an equal vote on EVERYTHING that occurs in the marriage. Regardless of your level of confidence your spouse still needs to agree with you. If not, why even bother talking to her about this stuff at all?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMO this phrase is a bad way of handling most marital disagreements. It's not quite a nuke but it's akin to a small tactical nuke. Enough small tactical nukes and your wife might decide to pull out the big guns and nuke you back (divorce or an affair or cutting off sex or something similarly bad).
> 
> We should develop enough confidence in ourselves and in our dominance and competence not only to merely SAY we are dominant, but to BE so dominant that we NEVER HAVE TO give our spouse such an "ultimatum" (do it my way OR ELSE....)
> 
> TRUE dominance is inherently persuasive. I actually think you're talking about something completely different--it actually sounds like you're talking about an inadequate/incomplete form of "dominance". Dominance isn't merely declaring yourself to be dominant, and then telling your spouse "if you don't agree, too bad." True dominance is displaying your true dominance and your spouse nodding her head in agreement. It is the ability to get the necessary buy-in/consensus for you to act without fights or ultimatums even being necessary. If your wife consistently engages you in disputes on a particular issue, then you need to consider whether you are really all that "dominant" in that area, at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You didn't say what any of them were actually. I doubt there is a single important area in a marriage where one spouse has "total dominance" in a typical marriage. You at least have to get the acquiesence of your spouse, and it's entirely up to her or not to choose whether to agree with you--even if her disagreement might be completely unfounded based on a logical analysis of the situation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is my point. Neither spouse has total dominance in any important area of the marriage, because if you don't support each other, you will just end up getting divorced. You are actually both "in control" because if you didn't support her plan, even if you let her do what she wanted in that particular area, your resentment would come out in some other area of the marriage. Just like hers would. It's basic human nature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All you need to do is give her your support. There is no need for spouses to have equivalent technical competence, it's often better if they have complementary skills.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It depends upon the skill you're talking about and the person who is exercising it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe if you're a stripper this might be true.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You haven't said what skills you're talking about. I have been assuming you're not just talking about sexual stuff since you didn't mention that at all in your post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well you certainly talk a good game. But talk is cheap.


----------



## Trenton

NoLongerSad, I really like you but wonder if you are marco by proxy? Everything you say is what I'm thinking but unable to write. It's all a big smokescreen. A concocted game to give the illusion of confidence and dominance and the relationship suffers.

I hope against hope that you're actually a man. That what's here isn't all there is. I really do.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

MEM,
For me, it is using a woman who is already broken for your own selfish needs. You already mentioned going to Asia for back massages and fully anticipate getting happy endings, as you posed it to your wife. You see nothing wrong in using either trafficked women or using women here who's back are against the wall. Either through former sexual abuse, drug abuse or alcohol abuse. Just go to a "hooker". These are real people. But hey, pay them $50. They mean very little to you. I find it repugnant.
21 years of a happy marriage and you threaten your wife with that. You know what. I'll take my 17 years of ups and downs and a husband who would never, ever put me in that situation in a trillion lifetimes. Nor would he ever abuse a woman for his own needs. Call me crazy but there are some men out there who actually respect women. They are called MEN. And the more I read I here I realize how much of a damn gem I have! Holy hell, he is amazing!!


----------



## MEM2020

NLS,
Your constant refrains about avoiding conflict/avoiding upsetting your partner to avoid getting shut down sexually speak for themselves. 

As for putting words in others mouths. I never suggested I was overall dominant in my marriage. I'm not. If you read my past posts you will see that theme is fairly consistent. My W takes the things I prioritize seriously. 

As for me - I feel very lucky in my marriage. I have about 10 days a year that are fraught and the rest are delightful. I would not trade that for a low conflict not so happy marriage. 





NoLongerSad said:


> Wow you're really scared and desperate aren't you? Do you realize that most of what you attribute to me, not only didn't I say it, I didn't even come close to justify your "paraphrasing"?
> 
> Also the whole thing about zero sex is laughably just you projecting your marital issues. Remember mem that's your issue? Not mine.
> 
> Also you obviously don't understand what a 50-50 relationship means or what a consensus is even though I tried to explain it. Being in an even handed partnership doesn't mean you are constant splitting the difference and playing a tit for tat zero sum game in which if one person "wins" the other "loses." Clearly you lack even the most rudimentary understanding of a healthy relationship.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Like I said, the more I read here, the more I love my husband. He is truly a King among Men. Dear God, he would never threaten me with hookers or anything else. He is a man with a brain and can articulate in a clear and concise way. He doesn't bull**** and play games. He says what he means and we agree on so many levels. He is had often read on this website and laughs at the crap. Like I said, I'll take my 17 years with a husband who has a brain and doesn't try to mind control me and he will take his wife who speaks her mind and we will eventually ride off in to the sunset. This *****y, "controlling" wife went in to hyper load today and sent out his resume today to all our contacts. He came home today after getting phone call after phone call from prospects and said "Thank you!". I got a GIANT hug and it is because I have always been my husbands partner...never wavered. I am his greatest champion. Funny, hookers never entered into the equation.


----------



## MEM2020

T,
The difficult with having a limited view into someones life is that it becomes impossible to place extreme conflict into context. The only other direct participant in our little "precipice dance" was my W. And she was extraordinarily upset for a couple hours and has been happy, energetic and super loving since then. Of course I have reciprocated. 

I will say that I struggle with the fact that you seem to primarily/only feel her pain. It strikes me as very one sided.




Trenton said:


> I didn't even think of disease. It's the hurt level it must have caused. I can accept you were being honest but it would absolutely crush me if my husband said that to me at any point in our lives. I did talk to him about it. Drilled him with 20 questions and different scenarios. Of course, he had the right answers as he's not facing it right now and had to know that the wrong answer would lead to me being upset so it was really stupid of me.
> 
> I think what bothers me is the truth in it all. I want to hope that it's just you and make you the bad guy but I worry that it's not just you but that you're just honest. I'm realizing that sex, for men, is so tied to their happiness in a relationship and it scares me. Honestly, it makes me want to go it alone and this bothers me too.


----------



## MEM2020

Brennan,
I never mentioned going back to Asia for happy endings. Where did you come up with that?





Brennan said:


> MEM,
> For me, it is using a woman who is already broken for your own selfish needs. You already mentioned going to Asia for back massages and fully anticipate getting happy endings, as you posed it to your wife. You see nothing wrong in using either trafficked women or using women here who's back are against the wall. Either through former sexual abuse, drug abuse or alcohol abuse. Just go to a "hooker". These are real people. But hey, pay them $50. They mean very little to you. I find it repugnant.
> 21 years of a happy marriage and you threaten your wife with that. You know what. I'll take my 17 years of ups and downs and a husband who would never, ever put me in that situation in a trillion lifetimes. Nor would he ever abuse a woman for his own needs. Call me crazy but there are some men out there who actually respect women. They are called MEN. And the more I read I here I realize how much of a damn gem I have! Holy hell, he is amazing!!


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

MEM,
You said that you are often in Asia and get massages. You clearly stated at that time that nobody was allowed to touch your junk. Now? You sing a different tune. You are open to it and you told your sick wife that you would have no issue with finding a hooker. STD's be damned. Sorry, doesn't sit well with me at all. Like I said, I have problems in my marriage but I'll take my 17 years, 19 years dating and 30 years knowing him over hookers and disease any day. And he would damn well say the same thing. We are a team and a great one at that. Maybe we should start our own website?!


----------



## Trenton

"I don't think so, but I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. Explain please?"

It's the internet, I thought you might be another poster. I'm paranoid

"Life is too short to be in a constant battle for dominance with your spouse. Even if you "win" it's a pretty hollow victory. I don't really want to dominate my spouse anyway, a lot of times I want her to bring the strength to the relationship, and fortunately, most of the time she's available to do just that. If I am always the "strong man" in my relationship that means I can't ever let my guard down and I can't ever really lean on my wife for emotional support.

To me it would really be a horrible life if I didn't think I could express my real emotions to my wife when I need to. I am or try to be pretty much of an open book to my wife so she gets it all. I don't know about you but I have quite a bit of "crap" buried down inside me and I think my wife has to be a pretty tough cookie to be able to deal with some of my "emotional garbage." 

So I really don't even understand the whole notion that a relationship should be like what some are advocating anyway. I want to be able to be weak and let my wife be the strong one, not always, but sometimes anyway."

Why though? I mean why did you come to these conclusions? After what struggle or experiences?

"So do I. Just kidding, yes of course I am, does it seem otherwise? Actually I'll take that as a compliment really that you can't tell just by the way I write."

Depends on who you're writing for I suppose. It's hard in this sea of one up men to think that a man could actually strongly disagree with them.

"It's definitely not "all there is." Most of the men posting here, at least about this kind of stuff, seem to be involved in, or coming out of, some VERY high-conflict-level relationships. Conflicts in relationships are bad enough as it is, without developing a relationship philosophy which deliberately encourages or exacerbates high conflict. I just don't get that part of it at all. I always thought that REDUCING the conflict level in one's relationships was the objective I should be seeking."

I've known quite a few men and most think they're pretty nifty but those that have to proclaim their niftiness the loudest tend to be the most insecure from my experience. It's nice to have a truly confident male on the boards. I just hope that you're ready to be shut out because other men won't like you. Not men who will see you as a threat to their "philosophies" anyway.


----------



## Trenton

NoLongerSad said:


> Yes very interesting isn't it?
> 
> Mem attributes statements to others that they never made, at least he's done that to me in this thread. He's made other statements about other stuff, like you've just pointed out, but then contradicted himself.
> 
> I pointed out that he is very inconsistent, but he's very persistent and very adept at glossing over his inconsistencies.
> 
> Now he's claiming what a happy happy marriage he's in, what a lucky guy he considers himself, when that completely contradicts pretty much his entire raison d'etre for being here--a guy who is NOT happy in his marriage because his wife at least periodically withholds sex from him.
> 
> None of it is consistent.
> 
> I don't think it's real.


Even if Mem weren't real and I will assume he is till proven otherwise (I'm an American after all so I will give you this same benefit of the doubt), he's speaking from somewhere and he has a large audience. That's what should be the most scary.


----------



## Trenton

MEM11363 said:


> T,
> The difficult with having a limited view into someones life is that it becomes impossible to place extreme conflict into context. The only other direct participant in our little "precipice dance" was my W. And she was extraordinarily upset for a couple hours and has been happy, energetic and super loving since then. Of course I have reciprocated.
> 
> I will say that I struggle with the fact that you seem to primarily/only feel her pain. It strikes me as very one sided.


Well, I see her pain as biological. Isn't that how you see a man's need for sex? The only difference is that if you had prostate cancer and couldn't have sex due to chemo I'm betting odds that she'd stand by you and not tell you she was thinking going to a prostitute to fulfill her sexual needs was a great thing to say.

I'm just disappointed, that's all. I would hope after so many years that our inner struggles with age and all other things in strong relationships would behave as support rather than cruel pain.


----------



## OhGeesh

Ban stick? BBW and MEM are both undersexed or living some fanatasy world power trip by reading their posts on here. I agree with Brennan and NLS!

"DOMINANCE" PFFFT


----------



## Trenton

So why are those against dominance suddenly coming out...oh wait, I get it now.


----------



## Mom6547

Brennan said:


> They are called MEN. And the more I read I here I realize how much of a damn gem I have! Holy hell, he is amazing!!


Amen, sistah.


----------



## Mom6547

Brennan said:


> He is had often read on this website and laughs at the crap.


My DH just says "What retard are you replying to now?"


----------



## Conrad

vthomeschoolmom said:


> My DH just says "What retard are you replying to now?"


I suppose he figures you are sinking to their level.


----------



## greenpearl

vthomeschoolmom said:


> My DH just says "What retard are you replying to now?"


VT, 

This kind of sentence hurts. 

When I talk to my husband, my students, my son, my neighbors, my friends, etc, I never try to hurt them even when I mad. I raise my voice, that's it. 

In my entire life, I never try to hurt others. I don't start fight. 

I want people to talk to me nicely, so I talk to people nicely. 

I want people to smile at me, so I smile at people first.


----------



## MEM2020

GP,
You either have manners and class or you don't. Clearly you do. While they can be taught to a child it is difficult to teach them to an adult. 



greenpearl said:


> VT,
> 
> This kind of sentence hurts.
> 
> When I talk to my husband, my students, my son, my neighbors, my friends, etc, I never try to hurt them even when I mad. I raise my voice, that's it.
> 
> In my entire life, I never try to hurt others. I don't start fight.
> 
> I want people to talk to me nicely, so I talk to people nicely.
> 
> I want people to smile at me, so I smile at people first.


----------



## Conrad

greenpearl said:


> VT,
> 
> This kind of sentence hurts.
> 
> When I talk to my husband, my students, my son, my neighbors, my friends, etc, I never try to hurt them even when I mad. I raise my voice, that's it.
> 
> In my entire life, I never try to hurt others. I don't start fight.
> 
> I want people to talk to me nicely, so I talk to people nicely.
> 
> I want people to smile at me, so I smile at people first.


You are so much classier than I am.

I see an ignorant put-down like the above and I figure the insulting jerk who wrote it is simply past help.

You showed me a better path.


----------



## Mom6547

greenpearl said:


> VT,
> 
> This kind of sentence hurts.
> 
> When I talk to my husband, my students, my son, my neighbors, my friends, etc, I never try to hurt them even when I mad. I raise my voice, that's it.
> 
> In my entire life, I never try to hurt others. I don't start fight.


Your personality strikes me as a pleaser. That is you. It is not me. My DH LIKES my prickles as much as he likes my sweetness. He calls it my edge.

That he and I think that there are people in the world who aren't super bright just is.



> I want people to talk to me nicely, so I talk to people nicely.
> 
> I want people to smile at me, so I smile at people first.


You have a right to be you! I don't actually care over much what people think of me. It gives me a BUNCH of freedom to be and think for myself. I like freedom.

So you know, I am not a mean person. My friends call me the nicest person they know. I help elderly people with their groceries. My best friend tells me she wants to be more like me in terms of being cheerful, kind and polite. 

But this is a discussion group. I come here and open myself to people thinking I am mean, harpie whatever. In my mind, I am going to think some of them aren't super bright.


----------



## Conrad

>>Your personality strikes me as a pleaser. That is you. It is not me. My DH LIKES my prickles as much as he likes my sweetness. He calls it my edge.<<

Then save it for him.


----------



## Mom6547

Conrad, you can block me if you don't like it. Won't hurt my feelings one bit.


----------



## greenpearl

vthomeschoolmom said:


> Your personality strikes me as a pleaser. That is you. It is not me. My DH LIKES my prickles as much as he likes my sweetness. He calls it my edge.
> 
> That he and I think that there are people in the world who aren't super bright just is.
> 
> 
> 
> You have a right to be you! I don't actually care over much what people think of me. It gives me a BUNCH of freedom to be and think for myself. I like freedom.
> 
> So you know, I am not a mean person. My friends call me the nicest person they know. I help elderly people with their groceries. My best friend tells me she wants to be more like me in terms of being cheerful, kind and polite.
> 
> But this is a discussion group. I come here and open myself to people thinking I am mean, harpie whatever. In my mind, I am going to think some of them aren't super bright.


  

Humble people won't think they are the best!

I noticed that you have a very mild and humble personality when you talk to your friends!  

We all have two sides, the good side for family and friends, bad side for people we view as our enemies. 

I am the same! Believe me! I have a strong personality. 

But I have learned not to make enemies, it doesn't feel good thinking that there are some people who hate me. 

Of course, you have all the right to be what kind of person you want to be. We all should be who we want to be, but we also should know that no matter who we want to be, we shouldn't cause pain for others.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

I appaud humility in people . I happen to have a very strong personality, but I LOVE humble people. But the fiesty ones are sometimes more exciting/fun to deal with. More than anything, I want people to be REAL. If they feel strongly against something, even if a little rude in expressing, I would want them to express it anyway, rather than "walk away", or block someone. 2 rude people will = chaos, but one who can use some humility in response can often get to the heart of the issue & reel the rude on in -in due time. 

Some of my thoughts on various things expressed here:



Trenton said:


> I I can accept you were being honest but it would absolutely crush me if my husband said that to me at any point in our lives. I did talk to him about it. Drilled him with 20 questions and different scenarios. Of course, he had the right answers as he's not facing it right now and had to know that the wrong answer would lead to me being upset so it was really stupid of me.
> 
> I think what bothers me is the truth in it all. I want to hope that it's just you and make you the bad guy but I worry that it's not just you but that you're just honest. I'm realizing that sex, for men, is so tied to their happiness in a relationship and it scares me. Honestly, it makes me want to go it alone and this bothers me too.


Trenton: Your husband KNOWS how you would react, so I am sure he is not stupid. Why would he want to put doubt in you. Plus he is not worried about the things you ask. But if most men WERE 100% honest & they have a HIGH sex drive, I think they will only share these kinds of thoughts with other men, never their wives. We do not welcome it generally. 

I think Mem is just being totally honest, I am so much like this. You would not believe what came out of my mouth in front of relatives on Thanksgiving- no less. . Somehow we were talking about Jobs we didn't take in the past or something, can’t remember how this came up, sister in law & Mother in Law sitting right there & my husband & I said 'he could have taken a Truck driving Job yrs ago but we decided against it, as I wouldn’t have been able to handle the absence & I might have cheated on him". They just looked at me They know we have a very strong marriage, so I could get away with this comment, it rolled off of them all. I said to husband later - I probably shouldn’t have said that. He just says, "they know you by now". But yeah, It was simply honest, but I could have left that bit of information out of it. 

I know a lady right now, her husband is a truck driver over the road, she has a total of 4 days a MONTH with her husband! This is a total of a month & a half out of a year !! I know she is heavily into her kids & family, so I guess she manages to make it work. I just know I couldn’t, I need my man around. 

. 


NoLongerSad said:


> Humility is underrated around these parts.


So true :iagree:





Trenton said:


> NoLongerSad, I really like you but wonder if you are marco by proxy?


I was wondering the same thing!




NoLongerSad said:


> I don't really want to dominate my spouse anyway, a lot of times I want her to bring the strength to the relationship, and fortunately, most of the time she's available to do just that. If I am always the "strong man" in my relationship that means I can't ever let my guard down and I can't ever really lean on my wife for emotional support.
> 
> To me it would really be a horrible life if I didn't think I could express my real emotions to my wife when I need to. I am or try to be pretty much of an open book to my wife so she gets it all. I don't know about you but I have quite a bit of "crap" buried down inside me and I think my wife has to be a pretty tough cookie to be able to deal with some of my "emotional garbage."
> 
> So I really don't even understand the whole notion that a relationship should be like what some are advocating anyway. I want to be able to be weak and let my wife be the strong one, not always, but sometimes anyway.


 I like this a lot. My husband definetely can lean on ME for emotional support, He is transparent before me always, as I am before him. It is rare, but he has cried in front of me, those few times were more about the love he feels, not some insecurity thing, these are moments I will treasure forever. Women need this from their men. As I have done many times also. I believe this is WHY I can get away with such honesty before him - and He with me -cause he knows my heart like no other- and I know his cause he shares it with me unashamadly. 

My husband never tries to dominate me. But I guess you all know that! I really don't need to dominate him either to get what I want.


----------



## Conrad

vthomeschoolmom said:


> Conrad, you can block me if you don't like it. Won't hurt my feelings one bit.


I suppose your better half doesn't depend on you for apologies.

Introspection certainly isn't your thing.

That's why you don't get the message in this forum.


----------



## Trenton

Hi SA,
I get that Mem is just being honest. That's what I appreciate but it's still hard to read. NoLongerSad, if being honest as well, proves that all men don't think the same. Hence the hope thing. I have thought it over and do believe my husband (knowing that he can't really relate as we've never been there). He has never given me any reason to believe otherwise so to condemn him and assume he is like another man is really stupidity on my part.

I have a very strong personality as well and often say the wrong things like you. I can tell you oodles of times so I'm right there with you. My husband has said those exact same words to me..., "they know you by now." haha


----------



## Trenton

Conrad said:


> I suppose your better half doesn't depend on you for apologies.
> 
> Introspection certainly isn't your thing.
> 
> That's why you don't get the message in this forum.


You don't seem like the apologetic type.


----------



## Conrad

Trenton said:


> You don't seem like the apologetic type.


Really?

I think you'd be surprised.

I own my stuff.


----------



## Trenton

Conrad said:


> Really?
> 
> I think you'd be surprised.
> 
> I own my stuff.


That's sweet. It's a good way to be.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Trenton said:


> He has never given me any reason to believe otherwise so to condemn him and assume he is like another man is really stupidity on my part.


 Same here, I do not at all think my husband is like the "norm" either. What men do not masterbate while married & only getting it once a week -cause they feel it is "cheating". Answer - only MY husband. I feel like I have to defend why I even believe this -every time I say it, but I know it is truth. I told him that was crazy, even I did ! 

I have even LOOKED for ways to get him to prove he is not SO GOOD & faithful, just to spur a little jealousy on my part. Kind of rediculous. One interesting way was our experience going to the Strip CLub . I wanted him to be totally free to share what he was thinking , feeling, who turned him on, etc. And not be afriad of my reactions. He hesitated a little at the beginning, we even had a little fight, but once he realized it was NOT about him enjoying himself, enjoying the sights, that 
I wanted to go back, it has been good ever since. So I got him to open up. He had to see that I understood this was entertainment that he enjoyed, not an assult on his feelings for me. 

The majority of women would NEVER allow their husbands to even consider going, if they even HINTED they might enjoy such a night out, that would be looked upon as a betrayal, in the dog house they go. So these thoughts are only reserved for other men. 

My husband knows I am not like this at all, or let's say I have "proved" that to him by him being able to share with me openly. 

I do wonder Trenton, if your husband admitted he might enjoy a night at a strip club, what would you think/feel? I am ever so curious.


----------



## Trenton

You know what's odd about my husband is that he's never masturbated. A hand job has never been an option in our relationship as he doesn't enjoy them. For so long I didn't believe him about this either and would sneak in the bathroom and try to catch him. One day I finally realized it was the truth and most likely why he's such an attentive lover. He does have a high sex drive though. Ideally, I think he'd like it once a day but we do it on average about 3 to 5 times per week.

I did do the same things you did too and looked for ways to prove he wasn't so good and faithful. 

We've talked about strip clubs before and I don't like the idea and he felt it was a toss up. He didn't want to go badly enough to make it an issue or else he would have for certain. He has been to strip clubs several times with his friends and said something about the fact that the women there are being paid to behave the way they are makes it less attractive to him so it's never really been a big thing. I think he likes knowing that the person with him adores him. That is his thing.

He's an intense lover, truly interested in pleasing me. It's the best thing, thinking about it now gives me chills.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Trenton: 

I am sure your hubby masterbated before he was married ! Mine did about 3 times a day. But once married, he felt only I should be pleasing him. Looking at naken women in mags & online -for him has never been a part of unfaithfulness "in his heart". I can easily hang with such boundaries. Even though I was orginally mad he did not masterbate (shows what a low sex drive he has in comparison to other men), it is beautiful that he looks at our intimacy in this way, his body is exclusively for me & me alone. 

Well, it sounds as though your husband did not try to hide the fact he would enjoy a strip club. This is good. Mine would not go if I had any care for us to stop. (only go about 4 times a year) -his 1st experience was just last year at the age of 46! Never went when younger. I do not mind at all that he enjoys it . The way he treats me every day & always has, I know this is WHY it is not a problem for me personally. I enjoy the food & it is entertaining to look around & see how some of the guys act, plus the way the girls dance & some of the lingerie, gives me ideas. We have only been to one club, it is higher class, no touching/grinding. We win alot of "Parties" (free admission, drink & food) plus can bring guests-cause they like seeing married couples come in the door. 

It is just a phase in our lives. It will pass.


----------



## Trenton

I hear you completely. I think if you both enjoy it and it's a good time then it's perfect. 

My husband and I do this thing where we go out to eat at a different restaurant once a month. He always picks the restaurant and arranges the whole thing. We both love it and have been doing it for about six months. Mixing things up and changing behaviors is a great way to create intimacy.

My husband said he has never masturbated ever. I know this is really, really hard to believe. Now you know why I would sneak in the bathroom and see if anything was going on? lol


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Trenton said:


> My husband said he has never masturbated ever.



If I would have never asked these questions to him last year , I would have NEVER learned this, but husband did it ONCE >> I was desperate for a daughter -after having 4 sons in a row, some guy at work told him to shoot a load in the morning before our scheduled attempt that night (I was big into timing these things)- so it would increase our chances for a GIRL , and what do you know, we conceived our only little girl that very night! 

I kinda want to tell his guy (now retired) THANK YOU!! But you can imagine how awkward that conversation would be. I told this little story in a room full of Christians one day, I had them blushing & laughing so hard. It was halarious. Only those who know me know how badly I desired a daughter. If I didnt have her yet, I would probably still be trying!


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

MEM11363 said:


> GP,
> You either have manners and class or you don't. Clearly you do. While they can be taught to a child it is difficult to teach them to an adult.


Manners and class? Telling you my opinion and calling you out does not equate to lack of manners and class. It equates to intelligence. I find holes and I will point them out. You are free to do the same to me.


----------



## greenpearl

SA,
Trenton,
Brennan,

My husband did a lot of things before we got married.

I know when he started masturbating, I know how many times he did, I know his hand gets sore doing it.

He will want to go to a strip club right away if we have one here in our city. 

He wanted to try threesome, or more fun stuff, but I told him it is not a good idea to play with fire, so many bad things might happen, I just don't want our curiosity to ruin our happy life. What we have is already very sweet I don't want to lose it, and I tell him how important it is. 

My husband is just a man. A lot of dirty stuff in his head, but he is also a very faithful man, I think it is his personality, not because I have done something. He was raised as a witness, witnesses are very strong about fidelity.


----------



## Trenton

SimplyAmorous said:


> If I would have never asked these questions to him last year , I would have NEVER learned this, but husband did it ONCE >> I was desperate for a daughter -after having 4 sons in a row, some guy at work told him to shoot a load in the morning before our scheduled attempt that night (I was big into timing these things)- so it would increase our chances for a GIRL , and what do you know, we conceived our only little girl that very night!
> 
> I kinda want to tell his guy (now retired) THANK YOU!! But you can imagine how awkward that conversation would be. I told this little story in a room full of Christians one day, I had them blushing & laughing so hard. It was halarious. Only those who know me know how badly I desired a daughter. If I didnt have her yet, I would probably still be trying!


LOL!


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

greenpearl said:


> SA,
> Trenton,
> Brennan,
> 
> My husband did a lot of things before we got married.
> 
> I know when he started masturbating, I know how many times he did, I know his hand gets sore doing it.
> 
> He will want to go to a strip club right away if we have one here in our city.
> 
> He wanted to try threesome, or more fun stuff, but I told him it is not a good idea to play with fire, so many bad things might happen, I just don't want our curiosity to ruin our happy life. What we have is already very sweet I don't want to lose it, and I tell him how important it is.
> 
> My husband is just a man. A lot of dirty stuff in his head, but he is also a very faithful man, I think it is his personality, not because I have done something. He was raised as a witness, witnesses are very strong about fidelity.


Not sure how your post relates to the thread. 
For what it is worth, my husband isn't "just" a man. He IS a man.


----------



## greenpearl

Brennan said:


> Not sure how your post relates to the thread.
> For what it is worth, my husband isn't "just" a man. He IS a man.


I am chit chatting with you guys!

Very often I get lost in my way!

I wanted to say my husband is a dirty man!


----------



## Trenton

plastic899 said:


> Why do you think that is "odd"?


I don't know. I thought almost all men masturbate.


----------



## Trenton

plastic899 said:


> I guess you are right about that.
> 
> I'd be kind of curious as to why my spouse never did.
> 
> Have you ever discussed that with him? Or is it too sensitive a topic?


We've talked about it a lot actually. I'm seriously curious as to why he's a freak in the masturbation department. He said he never felt the need or desire to do it. You'd think this would equate a zero sex drive but that's not at all the case.

I've told him over and over and over again that I have a hard time believing him and he always tells me calmly that this is my inability to believe the truth but not making him guilty of a lie.

I guess it's possible but it's really unlikely. On my death bed he's going to reveal that he was a liar, he actually masturbated...sheesh :scratchhead:


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Ok Trenton, Ask him how much he did before YOU came into his life to help him out. If he says never, I would definitely suspect he is withholding truth. ALL healthy YOUNG men who are going through puberty with testosterone surging WILL do this, or something is seriously wrong with them. 

OR ....

they are So religious that they feel it is a GRAVE sin & somehow manage to put their flesh down to such a degree - to allow wet dreams to take the place of them relieving themselves. 

That is my firm belief. I would surely not want to marry a man who did not have this urge in his youth. I was thrilled when my husband at least admitted to "up to 3 times a day" -before we married.


----------



## Trenton

SimplyAmorous said:


> Ok Trenton, Ask him how much he did before YOU came into his life to help him out. If he says never, I would definitely suspect he is withholding truth. ALL healthy YOUNG men who are going through puberty with testosterone surging WILL do this, or something is seriously wrong with them.
> 
> OR ....
> 
> they are So religious that they feel it is a GRAVE sin & somehow manage to put their flesh down to such a degree - to allow wet dreams to take the place of them relieving themselves.
> 
> That is my firm belief. I would surely not want to marry a man who did not have this urge in his youth. I was thrilled when my husband at least admitted to "up to 3 times a day" -before we married.


He claims never as in never, ever, ever. I've asked before we were married, during puberty, during childhood, etc. We are not religious although he was born in Bolivia and came here when he was 7. He's has had to face much and overcome much to be where he is today.

He has admitted to wet dreams and even talked about them.

I want to be with him because not only do I adore him but he's a great lover. I'd never even consider not marrying him because he hadn't masturbated. SA, he was the first guy to make me cum...come on, he gets major brownie points for that! :rofl:


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Trenton said:


> He claims never as in never, ever, ever. I've asked before we were married, during puberty, during childhood, etc.



Well, who am I to say! I would bet he is 1 in a million men who hasn't then. This is a very very very rare thing. I just asked my husband, not that many wet dreams for him, but probably cause he was taking care of business. Me & him NEVER talked about stuff like this in the past, very taboo, just the last couple years we have opened up.


----------



## Trenton

SimplyAmorous said:


> Well, who am I to say! I would bet he is 1 in a million men who hasn't then. This is a very very very rare thing. I just asked my husband, not that many wet dreams for him, but probably cause he was taking care of business. Me & him NEVER talked about stuff like this in the past, very taboo, just the last couple years we have opened up.


I'm a talker (have you noticed) and I don't think there's a topic that would make me uncomfortable. My husband isn't like this but he tells me he appreciates that I am and he is open with me. We talked about things even before we were married as I'm also a question asker. My curiosity about people is immeasurable. My curiosity with sex is just as high. I find human nature really interesting.

If he tells me on his deathbed that he's actually a masturbating fool I'll be sure to post it on TAM.


----------



## reachingshore

Here is food for thought:

There is "to be dominant" and there is "to be domineering". And then there is "to dominate".

I love it that my husband is dominant (the leader, the guide, the mentor) in daily life. He does not dominate me (control, govern, exert superior power and authority). I love it that my husband in domineering in bed (kinda self explanatory here  ). I would hate my husband's guts if he was domineering and/or dominating me in daily life.


----------



## Izabella

MEM11363 said:


> There are instances where I am totally dominant in my marriage. These are situations where my skill level far surpasses my W’s, and I am completely confident that I should be in control of what we do in those cases. That doesn’t mean I act unilaterally. It means I explain my plan ask for input, if I view the input as useful – I use it.
> 
> If however the input is to do something that makes the plan less effective/totally ineffective I briefly explain why and proceed. Where the plan requires my W to actively cooperate I explain what/why I need that cooperation while at the same time making it very clear via tone/body language that I am confident this is the best move.
> 
> Dominant does not mean dictatorial. I don’t order my W around. And I do not discourage questions/refinement. Quite the opposite. I am confident, not arrogant. That said there have been times when I have told her “we can either do this my way or I am washing my hands of this situation completely and you may run with it solo”.
> 
> Note I started all this with “there are instances where I am totally dominant in my marriage”. will close my post with this last thought.
> Skill based dominance is hot. In fact it might be one of the sexiest qualities a person can have. Dominance is not a dirty word in my house.


you described my husband:smthumbup:


----------



## nice777guy

Trenton said:


> We've talked about it a lot actually. I'm seriously curious as to why he's a freak in the masturbation department. He said he never felt the need or desire to do it. You'd think this would equate a zero sex drive but that's not at all the case.
> 
> I've told him over and over and over again that I have a hard time believing him and he always tells me calmly that this is my inability to believe the truth but not making him guilty of a lie.
> 
> I guess it's possible but it's really unlikely. On my death bed he's going to reveal that he was a liar, he actually masturbated...sheesh :scratchhead:


Just kind of catching up here on some of the fun stuff.

Guys don't usually talk about this stuff - but I can remember talking about it with a good friend during my last year of high school. He swore he never had - and I believe he hadn't - at least not then - haven't asked him lately though.

He said he just never got turned on by looking at his own hand.


----------



## Kobo

Good post MEM. I think people get crazy when the word dominance is used. People want to assume that they control themselves. The fact is we have very little control of ourselves. 20 years ago we didn't have cell phones, Internet, Cable TV, PPV, etc. Yet our monthly budgets now have line items for these because we have been dominated by a marketing campaign. 70 years ago we didn't give diamond rings as symbols of engagement but an impressive marketing campaign has now made diamonds a women's best friend. A man being dominant in his home is a marketing campaign for the woman in his life. It foster's attraction. VT's husbands disrespect of the male posters on this board was a show of dominance over those posters and probably got him a blowjob that night. 

The trick is to be dominant without your woman feeling dominated. If you can't you will get the reaction displayed through out this thread.


----------



## Conrad

Kobo said:


> Good post MEM. I think people get crazy when the word dominance is used. People want to assume that they control themselves. The fact is we have very little control of ourselves. 20 years ago we didn't have cell phones, Internet, Cable TV, PPV, etc. Yet our monthly budgets now have line items for these because we have been dominated by a marketing campaign. 70 years ago we didn't give diamond rings as symbols of engagement but an impressive marketing campaign has now made diamonds a women's best friend. A man being dominant in his home is a marketing campaign for the woman in his life. It foster's attraction. VT's husbands disrespect of the male posters on this board was a show of dominance over those posters and probably got him a blowjob that night.
> 
> The trick is to be dominant without your woman feeling dominated. If you can't you will get the reaction displayed through out this thread.


Indeed - call people a bunch of retards and get a blowjob because you made your wife feel superior.

He's a smart guy.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Conrad said:


> Indeed - call people a bunch of retards and get a blowjob because you made your wife feel superior.
> 
> He's a smart guy.


Not sure if you are joking here, Conrad. I did find her comment cringe worthy. Having said that, I think it was said off the cuff and not to actually mean we are all retards. If we are, then why is she hear listening to us?


----------



## Conrad

Brennan said:


> Not sure if you are joking here, Conrad. I did find her comment cringe worthy. Having said that, I think it was said off the cuff and not to actually mean we are all retards. If we are, then why is she hear listening to us?


I don't find her to be a listener.

I find her to be a "teller".

My evidence? It was a cringe worthy comment and - as of yet - no apology.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Conrad said:


> I don't find her to be a listener.
> 
> I find her to be a "teller".
> 
> My evidence? It was a cringe worthy comment and - as of yet - no apology.


I sometimes feel like a "teller" as well. I don't mean to come across that way and tone is difficult to express online.
The lack of apology is wrong. Perhaps I could apologize on behalf of us slightly aggressive women on this board?


----------



## Conrad

Brennan said:


> I sometimes feel like a "teller" as well. I don't mean to come across that way and tone is difficult to express online.
> The lack of apology is wrong. Perhaps I could apologize on behalf of us slightly aggressive women on this board?


I find you to be introspective.


----------



## Mom6547

Brennan said:


> Not sure if you are joking here, Conrad. I did find her comment cringe worthy. Having said that, I think it was said off the cuff and not to actually mean we are all retards. If we are, then why is she hear listening to us?


I post here. To his way of joking, he is including me as one of the retards.


----------



## Conrad

vthomeschoolmom said:


> I post here. To his way of joking, he is including me as one of the retards.


Read your post.

If you don't, I will re-post it.


----------



## MEM2020

Kobo,
Thanks for the feedback. I was simply suggesting doing something that works very well in my life which is to align your assertiveness/aggressiveness with your abilities. 

I personally cringe every time I hear either wives or husbands talk about how the man is "absolutely the head of the household". And the reason I cringe is simple: There is no way your knowledge, skills and decision making are superior to that of your partner in every area. Not possible. Which means she ends up watching you make poor/stupid choices over and over. How does THAT work out?

On the flip side, in more than half of the mature relationships I see the woman has gradually become emotionally dominant overall. And the male has become so conflict avoidant he doesn't even assert/aggress (I know that isn't a word) himself in areas where he KNOWS he is right. One big area where this is true is finances. A read a study of households that run in the "red". In 2/3 of them the wife is the spender, 1/3 the husband.

In the households where the woman is the spender the conversation is not about what is rational / enables retirement but rather how she "feels" - when her "controlling husband" denies her "right" to spend family money sometimes at the expense of college planning. 

P.S. - I also recognize that in a world solely controlled by heterosexual males we would all live in Soviet style apartment blocs.  

And so - my post. Which since it contained "male" thought DNA and the word dominance provoked the standard reaction. 




Kobo said:


> Good post MEM. I think people get crazy when the word dominance is used. People want to assume that they control themselves. The fact is we have very little control of ourselves. 20 years ago we didn't have cell phones, Internet, Cable TV, PPV, etc. Yet our monthly budgets now have line items for these because we have been dominated by a marketing campaign. 70 years ago we didn't give diamond rings as symbols of engagement but an impressive marketing campaign has now made diamonds a women's best friend. A man being dominant in his home is a marketing campaign for the woman in his life. It foster's attraction. VT's husbands disrespect of the male posters on this board was a show of dominance over those posters and probably got him a blowjob that night.
> 
> The trick is to be dominant without your woman feeling dominated. If you can't you will get the reaction displayed through out this thread.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

VT,
I agree with Conrad on this. Your post said "which retard are you listening to now?". It certainly didn't sound like you were included in that mix. 
Having said that, I don't know your husband. Perhaps he was mocking both you and us posters and we took it the wrong way. 
Like I mentioned, tone rarely comes across the way it should. Darn internet. LOL.


----------



## Mom6547

My husband thinks that participating on these boards is kind of silly though he would not hesitate to jokingly call me retarded. He also was responding to my comments about some posters view that woman should be submissive iirc.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Trenton said:


> I'm a talker (have you noticed) and I don't think there's a topic that would make me uncomfortable. My husband isn't like this but he tells me he appreciates that I am and he is open with me. We talked about things even before we were married as I'm also a question asker. My curiosity about people is immeasurable. My curiosity with sex is just as high. I find human nature really interesting.
> 
> If he tells me on his deathbed that he's actually a masturbating fool I'll be sure to post it on TAM.


 I believe you would !! I am a pathetic question askerer myself . I live to question, then sit back & analyze & ponder what I just learned. For some reason - back in the day, even though I talked openly about everything else under the sun, Sex was off the table for me. We did it in the dark, no noises, no hot outfits, if he touched me in a way I didnt care for, I was too embarrased to tell him. Looking back, I realize how insane this was, how boring, restricting, and a waste of Passion. It was there but we didn't outright express it. 

I distinctly remember one night , this is so bizare, we just got done having an orgasm together laying in bed & this Seasame Street Ernie Doll in the hallway speaks saying "I feel Great!" -not sure how his buttons got pressed, maybe the cat walking past ! -but for a stuffed Erie doll to help us say what we are accually thinking! We laughed soo hard, couldn't get over the timing. A memory we will never forget. 

It was that religious dirty mindset I was carrying around , like "What would Jesus do?" --answer -certainly not masterbate, give Bj's , hell he wouldn't even have sex - let alone talk about it ! 

Now that this mindset has been unearthed & burned to ashes in my life, LET the FUN & erotic conversations begin and.... never end. The dam has been let loose & the flow is the size of Niagra Falls in me - to speak on such things. 

I've learned so very much in the past 2 years.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

MEM11363 said:


> Kobo,
> Thanks for the feedback. I was simply suggesting doing something that works very well in my life which is to align your assertiveness/aggressiveness with your abilities.
> 
> I personally cringe every time I hear either wives or husbands talk about how the man is "absolutely the head of the household". And the reason I cringe is simple: There is no way your knowledge, skills and decision making are superior to that of your partner in every area. Not possible. Which means she ends up watching you make poor/stupid choices over and over. How does THAT work out?
> 
> On the flip side, in more than half of the mature relationships I see the woman has gradually become emotionally dominant overall. And the male has become so conflict avoidant he doesn't even assert/aggress (I know that isn't a word) himself in areas where he KNOWS he is right. One big area where this is true is finances. A read a study of households that run in the "red". In 2/3 of them the wife is the spender, 1/3 the husband.
> 
> In the households where the woman is the spender the conversation is not about what is rational / enables retirement but rather how she "feels" - when her "controlling husband" denies her "right" to spend family money sometimes at the expense of college planning.
> 
> P.S. - I also recognize that in a world solely controlled by heterosexual males we would all live in Soviet style apartment blocs.
> 
> And so - my post. Which since it contained "male" thought DNA and the word dominance provoked the standard reaction.


Mem,
I actually agree with you on this with the exception (in my case) about finances. Despite hubby having a degree in Economics and an MBA, he does not handle the finances and doesn't want to. I wish he would because at times it has been very stressful for me (during the lean years) and it would have been nice to have someone to help out. Creative financing if you will. Also, I must be weird, I HATE shopping. Cannot stand it. I don't overspend and I find malls to be like Dante's Circle.


----------



## sisters359

> Thanks for the feedback. I was simply suggesting doing something that works very well in my life which is to align your assertiveness/aggressiveness with your abilities.
> 
> I personally cringe every time I hear either wives or husbands talk about how the man is "absolutely the head of the household". And the reason I cringe is simple: There is no way your knowledge, skills and decision making are superior to that of your partner in every area. Not possible. Which means she ends up watching you make poor/stupid choices over and over. How does THAT work out?


I get that. What I cannot fathom is why, just b/c one person has a penis, he thinks he is more competent to make decisions when there is a true stalemate on a matter.

What do you do then? 

I'd want to take turns, frankly. "OK, I let you make the decision the last time we reached this point, and since we both feel equally strongly about our positions on this, it is my turn." 

It isn't about being "right," either. It is about taking responsibility. I do not find people attractive when they won't take responsibility for decision-making, and I don't feel good about MYSELF when I abdicate responsibility. To me, abdicating responsibility is an extremely weak thing to do, not worthy of an adult. So while I am perfectly willing to let my partner make decisions when he feels more strongly than me about the issue, I need to take responsibility on my share of decisions when we feel equally confident about our positions.

I also would have no respect for someone who tried to insist on making a decision despite an equal degree of confidence--and again, I'd lose respect for myself if I had to have this degree of control in a relationship. It is about mutual trust, in each other and in ourselves.


----------



## MEM2020

Brennan,
You are similar to my W. She handles all the bills, and never has liked to shop recreationally. She shops to get specific items. When she does shop she takes a lot of pride in finding good values/things on sale. 




Brennan said:


> Mem,
> I actually agree with you on this with the exception (in my case) about finances. Despite hubby having a degree in Economics and an MBA, he does not handle the finances and doesn't want to. I wish he would because at times it has been very stressful for me (during the lean years) and it would have been nice to have someone to help out. Creative financing if you will. Also, I must be weird, I HATE shopping. Cannot stand it. I don't overspend and I find malls to be like Dante's Circle.


----------



## MEM2020

Totally agree. Taking turns is the best approach for the occasional stalemate. 



sisters359 said:


> I get that. What I cannot fathom is why, just b/c one person has a penis, he thinks he is more competent to make decisions when there is a true stalemate on a matter.
> 
> What do you do then?
> 
> I'd want to take turns, frankly. "OK, I let you make the decision the last time we reached this point, and since we both feel equally strongly about our positions on this, it is my turn."
> 
> It isn't about being "right," either. It is about taking responsibility. I do not find people attractive when they won't take responsibility for decision-making, and I don't feel good about MYSELF when I abdicate responsibility. To me, abdicating responsibility is an extremely weak thing to do, not worthy of an adult. So while I am perfectly willing to let my partner make decisions when he feels more strongly than me about the issue, I need to take responsibility on my share of decisions when we feel equally confident about our positions.
> 
> I also would have no respect for someone who tried to insist on making a decision despite an equal degree of confidence--and again, I'd lose respect for myself if I had to have this degree of control in a relationship. It is about mutual trust, in each other and in ourselves.


----------



## MEM2020

VT,
I imagine your husband has recently benefited from the feedback and support you get on the board. 

I generally find your posts to be thoughtful. It has however become apparent that you will do almost anything to avoid apologizing (in public) which is simply not a positive quality. 

Everyone makes mistakes and so most people tend to be quite forgiving. But you have to ask. 

Happy Holidays.




vthomeschoolmom said:


> My husband thinks that participating on these boards is kind of silly though he would not hesitate to jokingly call me retarded. He also was responding to my comments about some posters view that woman should be submissive iirc.


----------



## greenpearl

Happy holidays to all of you here!!! I am very happy about finding all of you here!!!


----------



## MEM2020

And your consistently upbeat positive contributions are delightful GP. I hope your year ends on a happy note.




greenpearl said:


> Happy holidays to all of you here!!! I am very happy about finding all of you here!!!


----------



## Kobo

sisters359 said:


> I get that. What I cannot fathom is why, just b/c one person has a penis, he thinks he is more competent to make decisions when there is a true stalemate on a matter.
> 
> What do you do then?


 The point of Skill based Dominance is to not have those stalements. The person that has proven that they have managed these issues correctly in the past will be deferred to. 
If you haven't proven yourself skillful your wife will have a hard time deferring to you. 

My wife is great at researching subject matters. When a decision needs to made that requires a lot of research I generally
defer to my wife. She presents the info she's found and I listen. I then say "How are you leaning" and we generally go with her decision. I'm better at making decisions that may hurt someone's feelings and expressing them to the third party. Like when her mother wanted my daughters to stay with her for the summer. My mother held my daughter's for two summers in a row. We had our reasons and ultimately I said no. My wife agreed and there was no vote. I know she hates saying no and she knows that I have handled these types of situations before successfully with minimal damage to relationships. Stalemates should be at a mminimum. If you are having a bunch of stalemates then you're not practicing "Skill based Dominance". IMO


----------



## Mom6547

MEM11363 said:


> VT,
> I imagine your husband has recently benefited from the feedback and support you get on the board.


Not recently. And not this board. 


> I generally find your posts to be thoughtful. It has however become apparent that you will do almost anything to avoid apologizing (in public) which is simply not a positive quality.


I recall apologizing to Bob for inferring a mis-characterizing of him. I definitely remember apologizing to both Greenpearl and Deejo.

In this incident, I had not even noticed that anyone was bothered by that off-the-cuff, exaggerated quote. I DO tend to think that if you are going to post to online forums, you need your thick skin. And getting your knickers in a twist over such a comment is not my problem.

I own mine when *I* feel I have done something to deserve it. Damn those string willed, independent women who aren't going to apologize when someone else thinks they should! But since I do have strong opinions, my need to apologize happens frequently enough. You will see it again, I am sure.





> Everyone makes mistakes and so most people tend to be quite forgiving. But you have to ask.
> 
> Happy Holidays.


Whom am I asking forgiveness from? You are offended by that comment? MEM, I apologize for having offended you. I have a hard time apologizing for the comment itself since I want to be sincere. Our sense of humor tends to be crass. He said it. I posted it. And I am not particularly sorry that I did. I AM sorry for having offended or hurt a nice person like you. If I were posting directly to you, I would not say it if I thought it would offend.


----------



## Conrad

Doesn't sound like an apology to me.

Sounds like rationalization/justification.

You've confirmed a few things I thought.

I appreciate your honesty, if nothing else.

So much anger.


----------



## Mom6547

Conrad said:


> So much anger.


*I*m angry! That's rich. You don't know a thing, Conrad. You are bitter and twisted.


----------



## Conrad

vthomeschoolmom said:


> *I*m angry! That's rich. You don't know a thing, Conrad. You are bitter and twisted.


And a retard.


----------



## Mom6547

YOU are the one who labeled yourself that.


----------



## MEM2020

He isn't bitter and isn't twisted. He is offended. As was everyone else who read your initial post about "retards". 

All this talk about gender is quite funny. You have adopted the posture of the "male who cannot admit he erred". And it is just as unappealing as the male version. 





vthomeschoolmom said:


> *I*m angry! That's rich. You don't know a thing, Conrad. You are bitter and twisted.


----------



## Conrad

MEM11363 said:


> He isn't bitter and isn't twisted. He is offended. As was everyone else who read your initial post about "retards".
> 
> All this talk about gender is quite funny. You have adopted the posture of the "male who cannot admit he erred". And it is just as unappealing as the male version.


Perhaps moreso - because males in that situation largely don't point fingers.


----------



## Mom6547

MEM11363 said:


> He isn't bitter and isn't twisted. He is offended. As was everyone else who read your initial post about "retards".
> 
> All this talk about gender is quite funny. You have adopted the posture of the "male who cannot admit he erred". And it is just as unappealing as the male version.


I find it interesting that you guys come here and rail against women. And claim you can own your ****. My guess is your wives would disagree. You own the **** that feels right to YOU to own. As do I. As I mentioned, I have already apologized on numerous occasions for things I felt I actually did wrong. This is not one of them. If you would like to be offended, that is your right.


----------



## MEM2020

The females who read your post saw it as the same insulting message as the males. 

This is a textbook case of:
1. that wasn't what I meant followed by
2. "blameshifting" 





vthomeschoolmom said:


> I find it interesting that you guys come here and rail against women. And claim you can own your ****. My guess is your wives would disagree. You own the **** that feels right to YOU to own. As do I. As I mentioned, I have already apologized on numerous occasions for things I felt I actually did wrong. This is not one of them. If you would like to be offended, that is your right.


----------



## AFEH

vthomeschoolmom said:


> *I*m angry! That's rich. You don't know a thing, Conrad. You are bitter and twisted.



Conrad's a great guy, he's helped me out tremendously here in the open forum and in PMs as has some of the other guys and some of the women.

I cannot recall one positive contribution from you VT. No “words of wisdom”, nothing. All I can recall is animosity. Strange that. It's also strange how you see Conrad as bitter and twisted, I just don't see that at all.


----------



## Mom6547

MEM11363 said:


> The females who read your post saw it as the same insulting message as the males.


Ok. That is ok with me.


> This is a textbook case of:
> 1. that wasn't what I meant followed by
> 2. "blameshifting"


No it was actually a case of using what was written to say something ELSE. 

It is called conversation. It moves.

I don't feel any blame that needs shifting. When I do, I won't shift it, I will own it.


----------



## Mom6547

AFEH said:


> Conrad's a great guy, he's helped me out tremendously here in the open forum and in PMs as has some of the other guys and some of the women.
> 
> I cannot recall one positive contribution from you VT. No “words of wisdom”, nothing. All I can recall is animosity. Strange that. It's also strange how you see Conrad as bitter and twisted, I just don't see that at all.


Do you read anything but the Men's Clubhouse? I post in the other areas as well. Just got thanked a few weeks ago for helping a couple headed for the divorce attorney get back to the marriage counselor. I just recently received a thank you from a woman dealing with an abusive husband and a scared daughter. Huh. I must not contribute.

I read the Men's Clubhouse less and less since you specifically ask for people whose point of view differs from you to go away. You just want to moan about how awful women are. Boring.


----------



## AFEH

vthomeschoolmom said:


> Do you read anything but the Men's Clubhouse? I post in the other areas as well. Just got thanked a few weeks ago for helping a couple headed for the divorce attorney get back to the marriage counselor. I just recently received a thank you from a woman dealing with an abusive husband and a scared daughter. Huh. I must not contribute.
> 
> I read the Men's Clubhouse less and less since you specifically ask for people whose point of view differs from you to go away. You just want to moan about how awful women are. Boring.



I was talking about the Men’s Clubhouse. And yes, when people are abusive I ask them to respect my boundaries. It tells me a lot about a person who has no respect for another’s boundaries and trashes them.


----------



## AFEH

From a purely observational point of view, since I’ve been posting in the Men’s Clubhouse I have not seen one clash between the men.

And there are so many women that post where there are no clashes with men whatsoever.

Yet some women clash with women as well, in the Men’s Clubhouse of all places.

Seems the dominant theme in the clashes is “Strong and Independent Women”.


----------



## Conrad

>>As I mentioned, I have already apologized on numerous occasions for things I felt I actually did wrong<<

VT,

In other words, you sit in judgement over the feelings of another.

Loud and clear.


----------



## sisters359

I always believed apologies were for one's behavior, not for another person's feelings. More "I'm sorry I did/said blah, blah, blah; it was wrong of me." I guess I find it seems to skirt my responsibility if I say, "I'm sorry my behavior offended you." Like that latter kind of means, "I'm sorry you feel bad, but I am not apologizing for my behavior, because it WASN'T wrong, although I'm sorry you were offended by it." 

I think this is a really interesting subject, so I'm going to start a new thread about it.


----------



## Mom6547

AFEH said:


> I was talking about the Men’s Clubhouse. And yes, when people are abusive I ask them to respect my boundaries. It tells me a lot about a person who has no respect for another’s boundaries and trashes them.


Abusive? Speech from a stranger on the internet is abusive because you don't like what I said? Anyway this thread will die and you don't be seeing me in the Men's Clubhouse much I suspect. Your minds are largely too closed to care for different view points. To have a different view point is abusive for heaven's sake.


----------



## Mom6547

Conrad said:


> >>As I mentioned, I have already apologized on numerous occasions for things I felt I actually did wrong<<
> 
> VT,
> 
> In other words, you sit in judgement over the feelings of another.
> 
> Loud and clear.


I am not responsible for the feelings of others. I take responsibility for my feelings. I take responsibility for my actions. Your feelings are your responsibility. This is a good skill to learn. I hope I have helped you with it!


----------



## Conrad

sisters359 said:


> I always believed apologies were for one's behavior, not for another person's feelings. More "I'm sorry I did/said blah, blah, blah; it was wrong of me." I guess I find it seems to skirt my responsibility if I say, "I'm sorry my behavior offended you." Like that latter kind of means, "I'm sorry you feel bad, but I am not apologizing for my behavior, because it WASN'T wrong, although I'm sorry you were offended by it."
> 
> I think this is a really interesting subject, so I'm going to start a new thread about it.


Ok,

So, relaying the comment that your husband called the members of this forum a "bunch of retards" isn't behavior?

Does anyone else post such trash?

And, if not - why not?


----------



## Mom6547

Conrad said:


> Ok,
> 
> So, relaying the comment that your husband called the members of this forum a "bunch of retards" isn't behavior?
> 
> Does anyone else post such trash?
> 
> And, if not - why not?


Because they have tender senses of humor?


----------



## Trenton

MEM11363 said:


> The females who read your post saw it as the same insulting message as the males.
> 
> This is a textbook case of:
> 1. that wasn't what I meant followed by
> 2. "blameshifting"


I was not offended and I've read far worse passive aggressive, obnoxious jabs. I don't feel the need to type them in my profile and pout like a child.


----------



## MEM2020

Well at least you acknowledge it for what it is - a passive aggressive obnoxious jab. I feel like we are making progress. 




Trenton said:


> I was not offended and I've read far worse passive aggressive, obnoxious jabs. I don't feel the need to type them in my profile and pout like a child.


----------



## Mom6547

MEM11363 said:


> Well at least you acknowledge it for what it is - a passive aggressive obnoxious jab. I feel like we are making progress.


I acknowledge that the comment I made was, in fact, not the most gracious.It was definitely a jab, though I think passive aggressive is being used incorrectly here. I think it was aggressive period. I don't have any kind of problem making jabs of any kind at people who hold sexist views as was the conversation my DH and I were having. I feel ok jabbing sexists, racists any kind of bigot. If YOU view yourself as a sexist, then consider yourself so jabbed.


----------



## MEM2020

LOL

I had to look up the definition of "sexist" because I wasn't sure. On the surface I would say quite the opposite is true in terms of my opinions. In a world where the people who make the greatest impact do so with their minds and not by virtue of physical strength, the more educated "group" tends to make the superior contribution all other things being equal. So at 59% female/41% male the college graduation rate speaks for itself. 

But there are situations that occur which cause me to question that whole "sexist" thing. In any physical situation I react the same way which is I always - without conversation - take the least comfortable "spot". 

We went to our son's sports meet a month ago. She didn't dress warmly enough. I could tell she was cold and offered her my jacket. She declined. I just took my jacket off and quietly smiled without saying anything while she determinedly tried to get me to put it back on. Finally - realizing that I was not going to put my jacket on she took it and wore it. 

When we fly and get a middle/aisle combo I always take the middle seat. If she asked I would say I "like" the middle as I suffer mild agoraphobia when I fly. Of course that is a total lie. I prefer the aisle. But she feels claustrophobic in the middle. Besides - she is a "she" - so she gets the more comfortable spot by default. 

Does this mean I think "she" is "less than" me at some level. I don't think so - it just seems to be some profoundly hardwired "protector" circuitry. The secret service guys don't think they are superior to the Pres - and they protect him. 

Still, it isn't as clear cut as I would like.

And for the record - I would rather be called a "sexist" than a "retard". A sexist has the potential to "learn" a more balanced view. A retard doesn't. 


LookStat – Official Blog » Blog Archive » US Demographic Trends – College Graduation & Enrollment






vthomeschoolmom said:


> I acknowledge that the comment I made was, in fact, not the most gracious.It was definitely a jab, though I think passive aggressive is being used incorrectly here. I think it was aggressive period. I don't have any kind of problem making jabs of any kind at people who hold sexist views as was the conversation my DH and I were having. I feel ok jabbing sexists, racists any kind of bigot. If YOU view yourself as a sexist, then consider yourself so jabbed.


----------



## AFEH

I joined a company where I hadn’t clue what I’d let myself in for as far as the “office” was concerned. After seeing a client I returned to the entry to the office building to come across one of the administrators pushing a box of printer paper to the lift with her foot, she’d broken an arm and couldn’t pick it up. Me being me I just joined in and helped her get all the boxes into the lift and helped her out at the top. All well and good.

A while later I returned to the same scene but this time her plaster was off and she was lifting the boxes into the lift. Me being me again I started helping her out but this time round got accused of being sexist! It only takes one to start it all off. It beggars belief this stuff.


----------



## MEM2020

Bob,
I have learned to ask "can I help you"? in those situations. I accept that some women have been on the receiving end of sexist treatment and may react adversely to the "presumption" that they need help. 

I agree that it is disheartening when we get "slammed" for helping instead of a polite "I got it - thanks anyway". But recognizing that pattern I have learned to ask. 




AFEH said:


> I joined a company where I hadn’t clue what I’d let myself in for as far as the “office” was concerned. After seeing a client I returned to the entry to the office building to come across one of the administrators pushing a box of printer paper to the lift with her foot, she’d broken an arm and couldn’t pick it up. Me being me I just joined in and helped her get all the boxes into the lift and helped her out at the top. All well and good.
> 
> A while later I returned to the same scene but this time her plaster was off and she was lifting the boxes into the lift. Me being me again I started helping her out but this time round got accused of being sexist! It only takes one to start it all off. It beggars belief this stuff.


----------



## sisters359

I get very irritated at women who snap at men when they start to help. Seriously, get a grip! "No thank you; I've got it" really is all it takes. And if someone insists in helping after that, I just figure they like to help (I'm that way myself), so I don't make a big deal out of it.

I also get equally irritated when a man goes through contortions to open a door for me when I clearly do not need any help. But I just smile and say, "Thanks" and then I open the next door for him (Where I live, there are a lot of double door ways, due to the climate).

By the way, "because she is a 'she'" is just blatant sexism and of course you will be burned at the stake for it, Mem 

It's those little niceties that are, in fact, hardest for me to handle sometimes. In my view, I should make sure anyone older than myself is more comfortable--but if I offer my seat to an older man, he may get offended. (I know, blatant agism, and I too will be burned at the stake. )

If I'm cold and a man offers me his jacket, I often don't know what to do. I'm the idiot who came out inappropriately dressed; why should he suffer? But, if he's really not uncomfortably cool, I'd be equally idiotic to refuse the jacket. . . usually I'll wait to see if the guy is going to put it back on and if he doesn't, then I'll credit him with being a rational person who knows enough to put the coat back on if he is uncomfortable, so because he didn't he must be comfortable without it and, therefore, it is ok if I borrow it. Men are usually hotter anyway (pun intended). 

I'm old enough that I've experienced a lot of these little moments and my first assumption is always that the offer of help/whatever stems from the other person just being a nice person--again, I'm like that. Plus, I like people and I smile a lot, so it is always easy for me to decline graciously, and then to accept graciously if someone persists. It's one of those "why sweat the small stuff" things, I guess!


----------



## lime

With lifting situations, I either appreciate help or politely decline. It does weird me out a little bit if someone just kind of steps in without saying anything, depending on the situation. I would prefer a command like "here, let me help" over silence any day.

What REALLY bugs me though, is when, after I decline, the guy lingers and I can tell he's thinking "I could have done a better job than her." Um, yes you probably could have, but I'm the one moving MY stuff, and if it takes me a few more trips, then so be it. Plus I don't really care about doing a good job moving boxes or carrying a tray, as long as I get it done without injuring myself or breaking anything haha. 

The other thing that irritates me to the core is when guys begrudgingly offer, or begrudgingly help if I accept their offer. No one is forcing you to step in; either you want to or you don't. Own it or walk away; don't act like a victim or a martyr.


----------



## AFEH

MEM11363 said:


> Bob,
> I have learned to ask "can I help you"? in those situations. I accept that some women have been on the receiving end of sexist treatment and may react adversely to the "presumption" that they need help.
> 
> I agree that it is disheartening when we get "slammed" for helping instead of a polite "I got it - thanks anyway". But recognizing that pattern I have learned to ask.



Fortunately I live in a country where this sexist stuff is just not an issue. It may well reach these shores in a few decades. The personal values here are very “traditional” even amongst the young. It’s an absolute delight.

I just looked upon the young woman as mind blowingly immature and stupid, seriously ungrateful and exceptionally discourteous. But she never knew that and she never knew how seriously limited her career was because of her attitude.


----------



## MEM2020

What a great attitude. 

I also go out of my way to help delivery people - regardless of gender - getting through doors with their package carts. 





sisters359 said:


> I get very irritated at women who snap at men when they start to help. Seriously, get a grip! "No thank you; I've got it" really is all it takes. And if someone insists in helping after that, I just figure they like to help (I'm that way myself), so I don't make a big deal out of it.
> 
> I also get equally irritated when a man goes through contortions to open a door for me when I clearly do not need any help. But I just smile and say, "Thanks" and then I open the next door for him (Where I live, there are a lot of double door ways, due to the climate).
> 
> By the way, "because she is a 'she'" is just blatant sexism and of course you will be burned at the stake for it, Mem
> 
> It's those little niceties that are, in fact, hardest for me to handle sometimes. In my view, I should make sure anyone older than myself is more comfortable--but if I offer my seat to an older man, he may get offended. (I know, blatant agism, and I too will be burned at the stake. )
> 
> If I'm cold and a man offers me his jacket, I often don't know what to do. I'm the idiot who came out inappropriately dressed; why should he suffer? But, if he's really not uncomfortably cool, I'd be equally idiotic to refuse the jacket. . . usually I'll wait to see if the guy is going to put it back on and if he doesn't, then I'll credit him with being a rational person who knows enough to put the coat back on if he is uncomfortable, so because he didn't he must be comfortable without it and, therefore, it is ok if I borrow it. Men are usually hotter anyway (pun intended).
> 
> I'm old enough that I've experienced a lot of these little moments and my first assumption is always that the offer of help/whatever stems from the other person just being a nice person--again, I'm like that. Plus, I like people and I smile a lot, so it is always easy for me to decline graciously, and then to accept graciously if someone persists. It's one of those "why sweat the small stuff" things, I guess!


----------



## greenpearl

Ha ha ha, 

I like it when men try to help me, they help me carry things, they help me move my scooter, they hold the door for me, they help me on the forums..................I enjoy all the help!!! 
I just smile and say " Thank you, thank you!"

GREAT!!! 

They are men, they are strong, they are supposed to help ladies!  

I enjoy being a lady with weak muscles!


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

I will always appreciate somebody who went out of their way to help me, regardless of gender. A man who opens a door for me or holds the elevator is given a smile and a warm, genuine thank you. A woman who does the same, gets the same response from me. I have always held the door for anybody, man or woman, teenager or elderly. I will always push the "open" button on an elevator if I see someone coming towards it. That's just me. Random acts of kindness if you will. It is appreciated more than you could ever imagine, especially in a world today where everybody is looking out for themselves. There was a great movie made called "Pay it Forward" and it made such an impression on my husband and I.

True story: We were making dinner and I was missing several ingredients. I asked hubby to go to the store and he left. It took him 40 minutes to get back, a 1 1/2 mile drive. He came home soaked to the bone. I asked him what in the world happened to him. It was raining but why on earth was he that wet?! He tells me that he had taken the "feeder" road rather than the freeway (something he never does) and he saw a woman stranded, standing outside her car on the street. Her car had the hazard lights on and she was in the pouring rain looking scared. It was dark. He drove by her but then circled back and stopped. He got out of his car and walked up to her. She was even more scared at this point. She told him to "back off" as she was trying to call her husband or a tow but was having bad cell service and that's why she stepped out of her vehicle. He looks at the car and she has a blown out tire. He looks at her and she is very pregnant. He assures her that he is not a weirdo and that he will change her tire. She is still scared, very scared. He mentions that he has a wife and two boys. She calmed down a bit. He changes the tire in the pouring down rain and offers up his cell phone so that she can call home. She does. As he is walking back to his car, she asks him for his name and "information". He says no but she insists. He hands her his business card. She thanked him profusely, with tears in her eyes and said she would never forget this. He didn't think much of it.
One week later my husband got a phone call from the husband of the pregnant woman. Apparently, she came home and told him about his total random act of kindness and he was beyond thankful that there was somebody out there looking out for his wife. He told my husband that what he had done inspired him as well. He saw a teenage boy stranded on the side of the road. Another blown tire. The boy looked pretty helpless, so the husband stopped. Pulled up behind him and walked up. The husband said "Do you know how to change a tire?" "No, was the boy's response". He told my husband how he proceeded to show this kid how to change a tire. The kid was so thankful and said he never had a father in his life and that it was so cool that somebody, a total stranger, helped him and showed him how to change a tire. 
This husband told my husband that he would never in a million years have thought about stopping and helping a random person. My husband's random act of kindness inspired him.
Apparently my husband left a huge impression on him and his wife as that happened 3 years ago and we still get a Christmas card with their twins in a photo and a $50 gift card to Best Buy.


----------



## greenpearl

Brennan said:


> I will always appreciate somebody who went out of their way to help me, regardless of gender. A man who opens a door for me or holds the elevator is given a smile and a warm, genuine thank you. A woman who does the same, gets the same response from me. I have always held the door for anybody, man or woman, teenager or elderly. I will always push the "open" button on an elevator if I see someone coming towards it. That's just me. Random acts of kindness if you will. It is appreciated more than you could ever imagine, especially in a world today where everybody is looking out for themselves. There was a great movie made called "Pay it Forward" and it made such an impression on my husband and I.
> 
> True story: We were making dinner and I was missing several ingredients. I asked hubby to go to the store and he left. It took him 40 minutes to get back, a 1 1/2 mile drive. He came home soaked to the bone. I asked him what in the world happened to him. It was raining but why on earth was he that wet?! He tells me that he had taken the "feeder" road rather than the freeway (something he never does) and he saw a woman stranded, standing outside her car on the street. Her car had the hazard lights on and she was in the pouring rain looking scared. It was dark. He drove by her but then circled back and stopped. He got out of his car and walked up to her. She was even more scared at this point. She told him to "back off" as she was trying to call her husband or a tow but was having bad cell service and that's why she stepped out of her vehicle. He looks at the car and she has a blown out tire. He looks at her and she is very pregnant. He assures her that he is not a weirdo and that he will change her tire. She is still scared, very scared. He mentions that he has a wife and two boys. She calmed down a bit. He changes the tire in the pouring down rain and offers up his cell phone so that she can call home. She does. As he is walking back to his car, she asks him for his name and "information". He says no but she insists. He hands her his business card. She thanked him profusely, with tears in her eyes and said she would never forget this. He didn't think much of it.
> One week later my husband got a phone call from the husband of the pregnant woman. Apparently, she came home and told him about his total random act of kindness and he was beyond thankful that there was somebody out there looking out for his wife. He told my husband that what he had done inspired him as well. He saw a teenage boy stranded on the side of the road. Another blown tire. The boy looked pretty helpless, so the husband stopped. Pulled up behind him and walked up. The husband said "Do you know how to change a tire?" "No, was the boy's response". He told my husband how he proceeded to show this kid how to change a tire. The kid was so thankful and said he never had a father in his life and that it was so cool that somebody, a total stranger, helped him and showed him how to change a tire.
> This husband told my husband that he would never in a million years have thought about stopping and helping a random person. My husband's random act of kindness inspired him.
> Apparently my husband left a huge impression on him and his wife as that happened 3 years ago and we still get a Christmas card with their twins in a photo and a $50 gift card to Best Buy.


What a wonderful story!!!!!    

This world needs more kind hearted people like your husband who take the initiative to help other people!

When my husband sees a scooter accident on the road, he goes up and helps the man or woman up, then he would pull up their scooters, one time he stopped in the middle of the road so other people wouldn't drive into the injured person accidentally, I was cared, everything went out fine. 

I like people who help others.


----------

