CMV: Captain/first mate ideology is just a polite way of saying I can't be happy in a relationship unless I have my way 100% of the time.

[–]GridReXXit be like that8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Whoever is wiser, most rational, and most knowledgeable on the complexities of the task should have "final say."

This takes a level of self awareness and skill many people don't have , but many do.

I know many couples who operate this way. These couples also don't tend to argue as much because of said awareness and empathy.

As someone who operates this way, I don't submit to a C/Fm dynamic. I submit to competency and allow the more situationally competent person to take the lead. Now if whomever I end up with long term is simply more competent than me in most things, then they will have proven themselves "captain" by default. And I personally don't have an issue with that.

What I do take issue with is anyone claiming leadership status because they have a penis or they have a vagina or because their God or online doctrines told them that's what they deserve. That's arbitrary and garners zero respect from me.

[–]caesarfecitPurple Pill Man11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (44 children) | Copy Link

100% control is not captain/first mate. That's Sharia Law ;)

A fundamental truth of all relationships is that one person leads the relationship. It's like a dance, someone has to lead, someone has to follow. Sometimes it's implicit, sometimes it's explicit. And it doesn't have to be the same person all the time or in every situation. But insisting on perfect 50/50 equality is either a pretext to top from the bottom in bad faith, or it implies that both people are essentially independent and there's no commitment in the relationship. If you want people to exercise responsibility, they have to also exercise control.

The idea behind captain/first mate is that a man can and should assert control over his relationships, but that doesn't preclude delegating a significant piece of control and responsibility to the woman. In fact, the more control you can delegate in a captain/first mate relationship, the more effectively both partners function.

And if it stops functioning, you split up, preferably before you get married.

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]speltspelt2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BiggerDthanYouBluetopia5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

That's Sharia Law ;)

Actually most interpretations/schools of Sharia Law are much more equal than you'd expect. (but still sexist of course, but in the "men and women are equal, but different" way)

Even more equal than TRP in some regards because neither men nor women that sleep around should be eligible for chaste partners. Either both are sluts or none are, but they don't want relationships where the man is a slut and the woman is chaste.

Women of purity are for men of purity, and men of purity are for women of purity

-Quran 24:26

Both man and women can make the first move and propose marriage and unlike in Western traditions the wedding gift (Mahr) is given by the groom to the bride and not to her father. The man is supposed to show love and affection to the woman ("A woman is a center of kindness and a being who is completely emotional. Her existence depends on compassion and affection." could be straight out of TRP)

Part of marriage is a marriage contract where they can both agree on their own unique ways in which they want to lead their marriage, but in many cases this means that neither man nor woman are allowed to cheat.

In fact if you listen to average Muslims it's no different than listening to TRPers talk about Captain/First Mate.

According to Islam men and women are equal, but different. There are sex differences so it makes no sense to treat them both exactly the same, but those sex differences don't mean that men are above women in all regards.

The Prophet said, "All of you are guardians and are responsible for your wards. The ruler is a guardian and the man is a guardian of his family; the lady is a guardian and is responsible for her husband's house and his offspring; and so all of you are guardians and are responsible for your wards."

It's a role-based relationship that puts the main responsibility of earning over the husband and the main responsibility of child raising over the women. Both are obliged to fulfill the other's sexual needs. Both are obliged to treat each other with kindness.

The duties of husbands include that he treats her well and with respect

A man, who is supporting his family, should know that a woman is also a human being like a man. She also has desires and the rights of freedom and life. Marrying a woman is not hiring a servant, but it is a selection of a partner and a friend who would be able to live with for the rest of one's life. Man has to care for her and her desires. Man is not the owner of his wife and in fact a woman has certain rights upon her husband.

The secret to a happy marriage is the expression of your affection to your wife.

If you want to conquer her heart, if you want to make her obedient with regard to your demands, if you want to strengthen your marriage, make her love you and remain faithful to you, or..., then you must always show your affection to her and express your love.

If you deprive your wife of kindness, then she would lose interest in her house, children and, above all, in you. Your house would always be in a messy condition. She would not be prepared to make efforts for a person who does not love her.

A house, in which there is no affection, resembles a burning hell, even though it may be very tidy and full of luxurious goods.

Plus forgiveness

Some men think that they should be strict about their wives' mistakes as they believe this to be the way to prevent the repetition of the same mistake again.

However, experience often shows exactly the reverse to be the case. A woman, whose husband is strict with her, may be able to cope with his strictness for a while, but would eventually decide to react against it as a result of frustration. She gradually gets used to his attitude until she becomes indifferent towards it.

A husband who would not practice forgiveness with regard to his wife's mistakes, is practically encouraging her to become impudent and disobedient. He might wish to continue this attitude where he will surely have many rows with his wife. They both would have to live in a state of bitterness for the rest of their live

[–]GroovyEFS 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]BiggerDthanYouBluetopia5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

Now you are mixing up Sharia Law in general with specific schools/fiqhs of interpretation. That's like saying "you can't be Christian and gay because the Westboro Baptist Church hates gays"

The Quran doesn't even mention stoning. (but there are a few hadiths that ask for stoning in the case of adultery, but one of them also claims that the original verse about stoning in the Quran was accidentally eaten by a goat so it depends on how credible they take that one)

Most Muslim communities never even implement rajm (the act of stoning as punishment).

In almost all cases where it has been applied in recent years, stoning has taken place in tribal or rebel areas beyond the control of central governments—the Taliban in Afghanistan, ISIS in Iraq, and Boko Haram in Nigeria being cases in point. Out of the world’s forty-nine Muslim-majority states, six retain the punishment in deference to Islamic legal tradition, ... Of these countries only Iran, which officially placed a moratorium on stoning in 2002 but still gives leeway to individual judges, has actually carried it out.

There were no stonings in Pakistan or Syria, but you only focus on terrorist groups or countries like Nigeria or Somalia.

So if you only want to focus on the interpretation of Sharia Law by fanatics that's just not logical if it isn't how the majority of Muslims apply it.

[–]GroovyEFS 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]BiggerDthanYouBluetopia3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]Returnofthemack3Purple Pill0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]BiggerDthanYouBluetopia2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (13 children) | Copy Link

"Yeah sure, the Koran does have this bit here about stoning people, but it totally doesn't count because not every Muslim country does it!"

Do you even read what I wrote?

There is no mention of stoning in the Quran.

It's in a hadith that claims that the Quran mentioned stoning as a punishment but that this verse was eaten by a goat.

I may have not been specific enough what a hadith is, but as someone that has a such a strong opinion about Sharia Law I simply expected you to have done the basic research instead of just ignorantly repeating right wing propaganda

The hadith literature is based on spoken reports that were in circulation in society after the death of Muhammad. Unlike the Qur'an the hadiths were not quickly and concisely compiled during and immediately after Muhammad's life. Hadith were evaluated and gathered into large collections during the 8th and 9th centuries, generations after the death of Muhammad, after the end of the era of the "rightful" Rashidun Celiphate, over 1,000 km (620 mi) from where Muhammad lived.

Individual hadith are classified by Muslim clerics and jurists as sahih ("authentic"), hasan ("good") or da'if ("weak"). However, there is no overall agreement: different groups and different individual scholars may classify a hadith differently.

So depending on which hadith you rely on you can either say that the Quran does not have a bit about stoning, or that it did have it.

And your argument is that just because Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Nigeria, the Taliban and ISIS include stoning in their fiqh that this means that all fiqhs are like that.

Why are you more concerned with how fanatics interpret it and not how the vast majority does?

[–]GroovyEFS -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Okay, so it's in a hadith, that's still a part of Islamic belief so who cares? It's still there. And the Koran itself does have some pretty bad shit in it as well if you really wanna go cherrypicking, I'm sure you know this as well since you seem to have been researching the topic.

My argument is simple: this is clearly a part of Islamic belief. Whether or not it is practised by every single Muslim is not a claim I made. I know a bunch of Muslims (I live in London, remember?) who are perfectly nice people and certainly wouldn't support such extremities.

However, this does not change the fact that there are Muslim nations in existence right now which do condone these practices and have them written in law. You can write them off as "extremists" all you like but that doesn't stop it being true.

Saudi Arabia and the UAE in general is not ISIS, they are very rich and highly developed. You been to Dubai? Fucking beautiful country. It's hardly some third world shithole controlled by fanatics like you are trying to paint it as. And yet, it has some extremely strict laws. You can be thrown in prison for swearing. Even the middle finger emoji is illegal. Alcohol is illegal outside of tourist hotels. A British tourist was imprisoned because she had traces of codeine in her body - not even carried in her luggage, just detectable in her urine! They will even apply these strict laws to people with legal prescriptions.

And yes, they also stone women to death for adulatory over there too. In fact just last year another British tourist was arrested in Dubai for reporting rape... because it was considered adultery!

But yeah... nah... Sharia is super progressive and nice.

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]SoupTyrant1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SoupTyrant1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The only Christian government I know of is Vatican City

That's kindof my point, there are no governments as massively intertwined/influenced by christianity as most of the muslim countries are intertwined/influenced by Islam.

That's the point in and of itself.

However I was strictly speaking on the Bible and its second class status for women such as Ephesians 5:23 1 Corinthians 11:3 and 1 Timothy 2 etc

Yeah, and like I said, where in the world is that sort of Christianity even common much less enforced? It really doesn't matter if there are verses in both the Bible and the Quran that say similar things if only Muslims adhere to those verses and Christians do not. What matters is the reality of how the ideology is implemented in real life. Christianity, in practice, absolutely does not have "similar policies" on women.

For the record I'm an atheist and don't have a horse in the race and I get the idea of comparing the religions, but I really think it's clear that modern Islam and modern Islamic countries are objectively worse for women than Christianity and predominantly christian countries.

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Returnofthemack31 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]BiggerDthanYouBluetopia-2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Returnofthemack32 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]caesarfecitPurple Pill Man2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]BiggerDthanYouBluetopia2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Anyone can cherry pick pieces to make their case about Islam actually stands for, but it's all noise because Islam contradicts itself all over the place.

That's by design so that it can keep evolving.

Sharia Law is very unspecific and only general because it's just the path to god, but that path is different depending on where you are and in which time period.

It says treat your wife with affection and love in one passage of the Quran and says you can stone her for adultery in the hadith. Which takes primacy?

For them the Quran is the word of god while the hadiths are man made. They don't have to follow those. In fact each different type of Islam follows a different set of hadiths and some even none of them.

but also says she can be divorced at the drop of a hat, while not having similar rights herself.

But they do. Check the no-fault divorce thread by Groovy. I've posted a comment about divorce.

[–]caesarfecitPurple Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Anyone can cherry pick pieces to make their case about Islam actually stands for, but it's all noise because Islam contradicts itself all over the place.

That's by design so that it can keep evolving.

I thought Islam was the "uncreated" word of Allah and therefore has no need to evolve?

Sharia Law is very unspecific and only general because it's just the path to god, but that path is different depending on where you are and in which time period.

Sounds like a fantastic foundation for a school of jurisprudence.

It says treat your wife with affection and love in one passage of the Quran and says you can stone her for adultery in the hadith. Which takes primacy?

For them the Quran is the word of god while the hadiths are man made. They don't have to follow those. In fact each different type of Islam follows a different set of hadiths and some even none of them.

You're not exactly helping your cause. You're just muddying the waters by hiding behind the vast array of interpretations of Islam.

but also says she can be divorced at the drop of a hat, while not having similar rights herself.

But they do. Check the no-fault divorce thread by Groovy. I've posted a comment about divorce.

Another dodge. Based on my research, a woman can only seek a divorce in certain traditions, and only after she repays any bride-gifts from the husband.

There's no point in arguing with you especially on the subject of an incoherent and self-contradictory religion. If you insist on continuing this facetious put-on of cultural relativism mixed with devil's advocate, you're gonna have to do it alone.

[–]Wineallthetime points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]caesarfecitPurple Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]apube1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]caesarfecitPurple Pill Man2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

There's no reason why a woman can't wear the pants in a relationship, other than that most women can't, won't, and don't like assuming that role. Many men aren't really compatible with that type of woman either. But beyond that, it can work - it's just not for everybody. Captain/first mate actually speaks to that very well, in that even men who don't wear the pants still need their own personal space, autonomy, and authority to be happy, functional men. Think Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip.

That's one of the things I don't like about RP thought. Just because feminism threw out the baby with the bathwater when it comes to gender roles, doesn't mean that gender roles are set in stone. Gender is a polarity, a bellcurve, and you can have all kinds of unusual combinations that still work. Most homosexual relationships buck the trend of gender roles, with somewhat feminine men and somewhat masculine women. To thine own self be true.

[–]apube0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Wineallthetime points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]caesarfecitPurple Pill Man1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Wineallthetime points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]caesarfecitPurple Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Wineallthetime points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]caesarfecitPurple Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]prlmoon points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

A fundamental truth of all relationships is that one person leads the relationship

This is fundamentally untrue. It is the nature of some relationships, but not all.

But insisting on perfect 50/50 equality

So called egalitarian relationships aren't perfectly 50-50 equal. That would imply that every topic or problem, there is an equal compromise, which is practically impossible. It would also imply that everyone cares about every topic or problem equally, which is also not realistic.

No, what it means that Person A overall compromises as much as Person B. It's a relationship in which everyone's needs are met equally, and everyone exerts the same amount of effort into the relationship. Situation from situation this may differ.

I wouldn't say all First Mate relationships are comprised of selfish uncompromising people, but hell, if I was a selfish, uncompromising person, I definitely wouldn't make my way into an egalitarian relationship. Too much conflict and stress. I would find a passive person to date.

[–]caesarfecitPurple Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

People compromise in all sorts of ways. That's what love really is, it's doing things you wouldn't do for just anyone else.

And it's not about being with a passive person. It's about being with someone who will believe in you, support you, buy into your mission in life, and add their complementary strengths.

The problem is nobody can date their twin, and when you have two strong personalities that struggle to give way because they're each committed to their own way of doing things, it causes friction. You work at cross purposes, your agendas have trouble aligning. There can be respect, there can be love, but committment means a shared agenda - a common good. And it's hard to have that unless you both want exactly the same things, and even then there's always the question of whether you can count on the other to put "we" over "me".

The classic example of this is Frank and Claire Underwood. In some ways they're super tight as a couple and work together as equals almost seamlessly. And yet despite all that, their agendas still aren't totally aligned and their conflicting needs and strong personalities bring their marriage to the brink several times, nearly undoing everything they've accomplished.

The best explanation I can think of for why captain/first mate makes sense is Aristotle's "natural slave" argument. What it really is, is an explanation for why leadership and dominance isn't a bad thing. Some people by nuture or nature are better equipped to lead than others. Naturally, those less endowed align with those more endowed, and if there is mutual consent, it is because they have a common interest that unites them. The leader can't make decisions that aren't in the best interest of his follower when he's working towards the common interest that makes them a single unit. That's what makes those relationships harmonious and mutually beneficial.

The problem with holding up egalitarian romantic relationships as the ideal is because egalitarian relationships are for people that are fundamentally seperate people, like fellow adults. With people as closely linked as romantic partners, one person does and should end up exercising responsibility for the common interest, the whole. We know this is true because even in homosexual relationship, you have butch and femme, top and bottom etc.

It's not about the woman not having control or a say or the man having a veto power. It's about one person being able to trust that the other will step up, make a good decision, and be responsible when it counts.

[–]Returnofthemack3Purple Pill0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (59 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (47 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (46 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (40 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroEleven7 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroEleven3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroEleven2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroEleven5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

I'll throw in my completely opposite experience here: my mum makes all the real money, my dad makes so little he doesn't pay tax, and as a natural result of this my mum is basically the "boss" of the house. However, she is unhappy with this and has stated multiple times she wishes my dad would get a better job and "be a man" and make her feel protected.

Neither of them is religious, we don't live in the US either so this is a different culture, and even though my mum achieved some amazing things that gave her money and power, she is still disappointed that her husband cannot "lead."

I know it is only one anecdote, but hey we're all just sharing those here, and to me personally this to me says all I need to know. When even a highly successful career woman like her wants this, it seems pretty damn universal to me, as opposed to culturally driven.

And indeed, all my ex-girlfriends have wanted me to be dominant in the relationship too.

I also do not believe there is such a thing as an "equal" human relationship. All human relations have power dynamics.

[–]LeaneGenovaBreaker of (comment) Chains1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Do you tend to have the power within the relationship and if so do you enjoy this too?

It's definitely an interesting topic, and there are of course outliners of all shapes and sizes, but I do believe that in most cases men tend to be happiest being the "protector" and the woman being somewhat "submissive" as un-PC as that notion may be these days.

The dynamic between my parents has caused pretty much all kinds of friction within their relationship. Every single argument they have basically comes back to the fact my dad won't "be a man."

I also get a strong vibe my mum is insecure about her parenting as a result of this. For example last year we watched old family videos together and they showed her hugging me. She came out and said "ha, see, I did hug you when you were a child!" I'm just like... okay? I've never ever claimed you didn't...

I would bet the entire contents of my bank account that she blames herself for my problems and has built up this idea in her head of her being a bad mother because she spent a lot of time working.

Which, for the record, I find to be utterly ridiculous. My mother is the only person I truly look up to. She is an inspiration to me. I've told her this too, but she refuses to accept it.

Everyone has their demons...

[–]LeaneGenova1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well you know me, if you two are both truly happy with that arrangement I'm not one to judge at all. However I would posit that you are outliners. There are not very many marriages where the woman significantly outearns the man and runs the household and everyone is happy with this.

I'd say the norm these days is not necessarily the opposite either, mind. Since men and women are both in the workforce it's more like people pair off with those who earn roughly the same as them and there's a level of fairly equal financial contribution, but as far as the relationship dynamic itself goes, most women tend to feel comfortable when the man is generally leading - not dictating, but making the day-to-day decisions while still listening to input from the wife as RPWi advocates with C/FM.

I think this is completely normal and harmless, and it's only considered controversial on here because it's put into words if that makes sense. It's like how dissecting a joke kills it, likewise dissecting human social dynamics makes them seem more strange and sinister than they really are. It also sets off PC alarms if you discuss the topic of women enjoying the idea of a man's leadership, even though this behaviour carries on through generations despite it no longer being necessary either for social acceptance for financial reasons.

[–]nomdplume2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LeaneGenova1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

In our case, it makes sense for the person without memory issues and PTSD to make the big choices.

This seems pretty outlinery to me. Obviously what you do works for you because you're working around your partner's PTSD (very commendable, I respect that immensely) but your average couple doesn't have a party with PTSD or a similarly severe disorder in the first place.

Honestly, the reason C/FM is critiqued so much isn't that individual people like it. I'm good with that, and I think most people are. But the rhetoric is just ridiculous surrounding it: women are lambasted for not submitted by RPers, women practically climb up on the cross for their martyr complex at how terribly treated they are for submitting, etc. It's hard to take that concept seriously when that's what surrounds it.

Yeah I get that. There are those (usually male terps rather than the RPW themselves) who go out of their way to argue to the death that C/FM is the one and only true path and anyone who doesn't follow it is wrong and bad. This is clearly bullshit. Generalisations do not apply to literally everyone. Too many terps lack an understanding of nuance.

But about the women's "martyr complex at how terribly treated they are for submitting" honestly in my real world experience this is legit. When I was with my ex a fair few of her friends tried to get her to break up with me because of our dynamic despite the fact she consented to and enjoyed it. They said our relationship was gross and wrong and all sorts. Women can and do get shit for being submissive.

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LeaneGenova1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LeaneGenova1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I have the least maternal instinct out of any woman I know.

Well, my experience says that you won't know until you actually have kids of your own (not saying you should, of course). When they say that everything changes when you have a child, you have no idea just how deep that rabbit hole goes, lol. To say that everything you know and everything you've ever known and your entire idea of reality changes wouldn't be overstating it, at least for a lot of people.

Honestly, seeing as I've been with my partner for so long, I don't think I'd manage to NOT make him my priority.

Oh, you can, believe me, lol.

My wife and I had been together for fifteen years when we finally got pregnant. Fifteen years of marital bliss. And my wife told me, when we got pregnant, "I want you to know that, no matter what, I promise you will always be #1 in my life!"

A year or two after having a kid (which meant a year or two of feeling entirely ignored and neglected by my wife - a very common experience, according to everyone) I brought that promise up to my wife. She responded the only way she could. Namely, that she had no idea what she was promising at the time. She apologized, but really couldn't find a way to be other than how she was being.

There is a reason that probably two-thirds of the huge number of divorces that have occurred in my community in recent years have happened after long-married couples finally had kids.

(Not to mention, having kids as a female attorney is REALLY fucking hard.)

Yep.

A good friend of mine is a really high-profile attorney who has worked on defense teams for defendants who you would be instantly familiar with from the national media. She is big time.

She had a kid five years ago. Her marriage was the first casualty (like everyone else I know, it seems) when it fell apart about three years in, but now she's looking to basically give up her career so she can spend more time with her daughter. She'll still practice, of course, but she is going to give up on the big time and just take smaller, easier, less time-consuming cases from here on out.

Such is the nature of having kids.

[–]LeaneGenova1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRanger1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don't think it's the same.

I absolutely know the power of parental love. I love my son more than anything in the world, and I would sacrifice myself for him without even thinking about it.

But the way I love and relate to my son is still different from the way that my wife does. For her, he is all-consuming (true for many mothers, as I've seen). She deprioritized me the moment he came along (and given our life and who are son is, the priorities really fucking matter). I did not deprioritize her the same way, and I know a lot of frustrated new fathers have experienced this as well. Our therapist concurs that it's pretty common for women to basically forget about their husbands when they have young kids. A few years later, they are like, "Oh! Hi! Who are you again? Can we hang out?"

There is a reason that couples are most at risk for divorce in the five years after having kids (also after the kids leave home).

If nothing else, the man's sex drive makes him prioritize his wife, lol. She, on the other hand, may not have a sex drive again until long after her child is born.

[–]MagicGainbowKeepin' it real, havin' a feel2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]rreliable1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]rreliable1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]rreliable0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Reed_49830 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]OfSpock3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]OfSpock2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mashakosMastered Himself, Mastered The Pussy4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Reed_49830 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Reed_49830 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (88 children) | Copy Link

[–]pitaenigmaBeta Male Seeks Cock Carouseler24 points25 points26 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (86 children) | Copy Link

[–]TempestTcup points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]TempestTcup points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]TempestTcup points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]TempestTcup points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]TempestTcup8 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TempestTcup8 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NalkaNalka6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TempestTcup5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TempestTcup9 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Camille113256 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]TempestTcup points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TempestTcup3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]mashakosMastered Himself, Mastered The Pussy2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]tplg 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

even when the captain defers to the first mate's wishes it is just that: a deferment

You're right, it's just a deferment. Just like when things would be the other way around. There's no force in a captain/first mate dynamic; both can choose to go with the other person's wishes, or leave the dynamic if they do not like it.

The wife didn't really make that decision, he did

And he doesn't decide for the wife if/when she defers, she does. Weird huh? It's almost like it goes both ways. /s

and as such he has all the power and makes all the decisions.

No, he doesn't. He only has all the power for as long as his wife respects him enough to give him that power. She can take that power away from him whenever she wants.

Why is it so hard for you to understand that deferring is a choice woman make, just as it's a choice men make. Women aren't helpless little creatures who need men to give them power in order to have it.

In western society allowing someone else to decide for you is as much of a conscious decision as deciding for yourself, and just as legitimate too.

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]tplg 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

What makes you think the expectation is always deferment? The more you talk about this topic, the more you're starting to sound like you know nothing about it.

when she doesn't, she's the one causing problems even if it's just her not feeling this is the best course of action

I'm guessing you've never been in that position, nor known anyone who has. With people who are worth my time not being deferring when I usually am does not make me the problem. Quite the contrary, it makes people listen to me on the few occasions that I do speak up, because people know I'm not the type to argue for the heck of agruing or causing trouble.

Something entirely off topic: what makes you believe the things you do about more traditional dynamics between people? Because your ideas don't seem to match the reality I, and quite a lot of others, experience on a daily basis.

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

It's not at all dead in the west. It's still the way it has always been, it's just not codified anymore. Just because most cultural institutions don't actively promote it anymore doesn't mean that suddenly all the ingrained sexual dynamics are no longer there.

Women must respect a man in order to find him sexually attractive, and it takes a certain kind of man to command respect from others. Leaders command respect, which is why they are considered leaders.

So women are turned on by leaders (the relationship between female desire and power has been known for millennia). Given that, then, it would make sense that women might actually enjoy being married to a leader.

Given that leadership is actually difficult and is usually the result of intentional growth and development, and that it's rarely emphasized for men anymore, I get that lots of marriages aren't going to involve real leadership (and lots of marriages also fail, and usually because the wife decides to pull the plug). But that is due to a lack of societal support for leadership development, not because women no longer want to marry men who possess leadership qualities.

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

There is always a need for a leader. In every area of life.

If I'm not following someone, then I'm the de facto leader. That's how life works. I love it when I get to follow someone else's lead. It's so much fucking easier. Unfortunately, there are very few people who put in the effort to lead, and even fewer whose leadership I trust, so I end up being leader most of the time in life.

So I usually find myself leading in life. Now, how is it degrading if my wife chooses to follow my lead rather than taking the lead herself? If anything, I think she feels more free, not less, because she doesn't have as much to worry about. She knows that I will make sure things are handled well, and I am honored by her trust and respect.

And a woman doesn't have to do or give up anything, ever. If she's in a relationship, she is there by her own free will. And if she is content to follow rather than aspiring to lead, where is her freedom being impinged?

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I really think that having a captain implies that the woman is less than and I find it disturbing.

Well, that's your own personal interpretation, an interpretation that seems to be giving you heartburn. You might want to stop projecting that personal problem onto others.

I have been a manager and when I left for a new job generally a subordinate would replace me

Yeah, that sometimes happens. Oftentimes, it doesn't.

in this position she's always the subordinate.

Not at all.

The FO is both capable of and prepared to assume command of the ship at a moments notice. And the ship is always under the command of the FO the moment the captain is unable to fulfill his duties.

You apparently aren't aware of the oft-mentioned 'drunk captain' analogy, where a failing husband/'captain' is replaced at the helm by his wife/'FO'. That is a huge failure, and has a great impact on the health of the marriage, primarily because it involves a break in trust and a loss of respect for the husband, trust and respect that he is going to have to work hard to regain if he ever wants to experience his wife's affections again.

There is nothing that says that a woman can't helm the ship, it's just that they usually resent having to do so. Much like employees who have to cover for the failure of their boss.

[–]Reed_49830 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Reed_49830 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Well, the kind of woman that wants her boyfriend to decide where to eat out, what to do this evening. The one who trusts her boyfriend to make the final decision on important stuff like household purchases, financial decisions and the like. That sometimes likes to coast along, while still being a person able to make own decisions. The kind of woman that knows she can be a follower but always disagree, and in the worst case, file a divorce and still be financially secure. That kind of woman that knows she can call the cops and doesn't have to be afraid of being physically abused, unlike a hundred years ago. And unlike the traditional patriarchal househould with hierachies of "god, then man, then woman" that was described in this thread when someone talked about his parents' relationship.

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Reed_49831 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (42 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (41 children) | Copy Link

[–]caesarfecitPurple Pill Man2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

[–]caesarfecitPurple Pill Man4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

Then if she doesn't trust his leadership when it counts , she shouldn't be in the relationship!

By your logic, people who work in the federal government should be allowed to protest, obstruct, and contradict Trump's orders because they're affected by his decisions. That's the reason why there's a President, otherwise you have chaos in a place where you cannot afford it, with everyone in the Executive Branch rowing in different directions.

Relationships do not function well without a stable power dynamic. Otherwise you have chaos and power struggles that make both of you crazy.

Shared responsibility is in effect no responsibility because either people don't step up to the plate, or they work at cross purposes and that creates conflict. The captain/first mate model is a compromise between the fact that relationships need to have a stable power dynamic, but function best when both have as much equal autonomy as possible. That's why 99.9% of couples can't do polyamory/open relationships. It inevitably degenerates into a power struggle and stresses the trust bonds of the relationship to the breaking point. You need two very mature people who have a rock solid relationship to even contemplate it.

Relationships that are perfectly equal and don't need a leader is something that sounds ideal in principle but is nearly impossible to achieve in real life, like stateless societies and open relationships.

Tbh if I were you, I'd start asking yourself if you have authority issues. I recognize the symptoms from personal experience.

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–]lollygagyoSociopathic Fake Flirter4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]caesarfecitPurple Pill Man4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]lollygagyo6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]caesarfecit2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lollygagyo4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]caesarfecit1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]caesarfecitPurple Pill Man-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]caesarfecit1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The article was informative and very misogynistic . I want my wife because she is the women I love not because of who I want to mold her into

Well, if you don't want to improve her how your judgment knows best, that is your decision.

I don't subscribe to any theory about gender dynamics but saying you couldn't find one so you settled on the red pill is like saying you couldn't find a good race dynamic theory so you joined the KKK.

There is no settling here. The theory makes sense and real world application is ridiculously effective. I don't care about rp, I care about what's true.

Misogyny is part of reality, so is misandry, and racism for that matter. The KKK is a terrible comparison, rp is not a cult or religion and doesn't tell you what to do with the information. We have some rp believers that are socialist or marxist, as dumb as that is to me lol.

Wait till you find dark enlightenment.

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan7 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm already married, quite happily. Rp does come across as very cult like, it's like a direct marketing company. Field reports, AWALT, and

Whats your sex life like?

the fact somehow women are both emotional children who can't make their own decisions and conniving Machiavellians who manipulate men

Hahaha it is an absurd or terrifying contradiction.

To clarify, women are rather emotional and that makes them childlike. Women absolutely can make their own decisions, no one ever said otherwise.

Women are amazing at playing to people's emotions, they like to do it, it's natural and what they enjoy doing. This is a large part of what makes them Machiavellian by nature.

seems to be all just men whining about how women aren't everything they want them to be.

I just wanted them to be logical, loyal, honorable, moral. Heh. Too much to ask for apparently.

Part of having an adult relationship is accepting that not everything is going to be your way all the time.

Yeah no shit. We're not dumb, nor is anyone expecting that.

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

My sex life is very active. The contradiction is where the whole philosophy unravels. It's also absurd they're right next to each other in the rp constitution you'd think they'd be further apart to at least in part justify such a lapse in judgment.

Oh it makes sense when you see the whole picture. If it wasn't that way women would really fuck men up, and they'd have even less use for us.

Is it weird that men and women complement each other and that necessarily gives us each strength and weaknesses?

Male and female nature is not mostly the same as the egalitarian/feminist view puts it, not that we don't share some commonalities too.

My wife is all of that and more importantly has an interesting personality and we can talk and joke and laugh and have a good time every day. I have a hard time believing most of the rp isn't at least unrealistic if not dumb.

Would you consider your wife to be a bit above average or rather rare? How easily could you find another woman similar to her?

You're a lucky man to feel that way, I consider myself lucky too. Most men, rp or not, can't talk about their wife or SO that way and wish they could.

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]caesarfecit1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lynx_and_nutmeg0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]littyagain111110 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]wombatinaburrow1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]palaceposy67063 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]anitapkcsarlbmed ggse11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (116 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheChemist158Non-Feminist Blue Pill Woman9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (51 children) | Copy Link

[–]anitapkcsarlbmed ggse5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (49 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I think it's more complicated, beneath the surface. The feminine tends to be a support personality. A woman who is more at home carving her own path, is naturally going to be suspicious of anyone telling her that her place is to surrender to the will of another.

Or even hostile.

Especially if she's seen a bad relationship using that dynamic.

It doesn't help that so much of the debate about this issue is dishonest. Feminists try to sweep the agency of female submission under the rug. Right wing researchers claim you can measure sexual interest by the amount of babies they have (Take THAT, egalitarians who tend to favor smaller families!), and bend definitions so they can pretend all attractive behaviors are alpha as Hell in men. (Leaders of men are noted for their lowered heads of shame, right?)

With feminists pretending submissives don't exist, and anti-feminists pretending women are better off submissive, it's all so painfully stupid and self-serving, that which side you end up on, has more to do with which side's bullshit pissed you off the most.

Which leads to our current problem - if you asked most people whether they were authoritarian or not, the first thing they'll do, is imagine being forced to surrender to the other side. The real authoritarians are willing to do whatever it takes, allow any abuse of power, to prevent that from happening.

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

is naturally going to be suspicious of anyone telling her that her place is to surrender to the will of another.

I don't believe in 'places', so I would be suspicious, too.

Now, I might encourage women to ask the question, 'If you found someone whom you really trust and respect, might you enjoy 'letting go' and falling into the space he creates for you?'

I probably don't have to tell you about that, since you identify as submissive yourself (and I'm only commenting on it from the other side of the dynamic).

As someone who tends to take the 'dominant' role, I have little patience for women who can't 'let go' with me. It's not that they are wrong for that, but I'm generally a fairly ambitious and energetic person and leader and lover (all in my own particular ways, many of which aren't necessarily stereotypical), so if you keep trying to pull me into your 'frame' in order to take control, things just aren't going to work well between us.

I think I am generally very good at showing a woman a exceptional time (at least, the types of women who find me attractive to begin with), and I also like to take care of the women in my life such that I make their care a priority. If you are unwilling to let me be me and let me do what I do best, neither of us are going to have much fun.

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

'If you found someone whom you really trust and respect, might you enjoy 'letting go' and falling into the space he creates for you?'

I probably don't have to tell you about that, since you identify as submissive yourself (and I'm only commenting on it from the other side of the dynamic).

That's a great way of describing it. Thank you for that - it's sometimes difficult to explain what it's like to be a submissive, in any sense that isn't altruistic.

As someone who tends to take the 'dominant' role, I have little patience for women who can't 'let go' with me.

What if someone's still learning how? Many of us were shamed when we admitted to it, men and women both. Serious power imbalances in relationships were kind of hidden until recent.

I think I am generally very good at showing a woman a exceptional time (at least, the types of women who find me attractive to begin with), and I also like to take care of the women in my life such that I make their care a priority.

I never would have understood this, until I was trained as a Dominant, by a patient Domme and an understanding submissive or four. Perhaps everyone with doubts should have experiences with both sides before they judge?

If you are unwilling to let me be me and let me do what I do best, neither of us are going to have much fun.

The same is true on our end of the equation. We can help bring other people's stories to life, but if you're waiting for us to tell you what to do, all day and all night, you're kind of wasting our time?

I know that sounds cruel, but...

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What if someone's still learning how?

Well, you're right - sometimes I can sense the 'inner submissive' in women, lol, and am willing to give them a shot at learning more.

But most of the time, I'm just not interested in wasting time and energy trying to figure out if they have an 'inner submissive' or not.

Since, for me, 'submission' is very much a function of 'respect' and 'trust', I kind of treat it similarly - if you don't kind of naturally respect me or trust me as a result of who we are when we are together, I'm not sure how interested I am in trying change your mind.

I think this is what many people mean when they say they don't want to deal with 'baggage.'

I learned early on (through a lot of heartache) that most 'diamonds in the rough' aren't worth it. I remember so many relationships where most of the relationship was about me trying to convince her that I wasn't her asshole ex-boyfriend and that I wasn't going to hurt her the way he did (I have my own ways of hurting people, much to my great chagrin, but they usually aren't like the guy who came before me, lol). I got tired of that game.

Perhaps everyone with doubts should have experiences with both sides before they judge?

Again, submission for me is very much like trust and respect. I am more than happy to 'give up control' to someone whom I really trust and respect. I mean, it's a relief for me, since I'm usually the one who winds up being the leader.

The problem for me is - there aren't that many people in life whom I truly trust and respect such that I am willing to share responsibility for how my life turns out with them. They do exist, don't get me wrong, but they are rare, and they are usually not female (and no, that doesn't mean I hate women or think they are inferior or whatever).

And that unwillingness to be a 'submissive' or a 'follower' has nothing to do with whether I think people are good or have my best interests at heart. I think many/most people in my life are both good and do have my best interests at heart. They just aren't as good at making things happen as I am.

All that said, I'm more than happy to top from the bottom in the bedroom, lol. I actually love getting to do that with the right person.

if you're waiting for us to tell you what to do, all day and all night, you're kind of wasting our time?

This this this. And it's not cruel at all. It's just how we are.

I realize that you are male, but what you wrote right there is exactly the feminine/submissive mindset (and I do believe that femininity and submissiveness tend to go together, even if that isn't always true).

I mean, that, to me, is the greatest defense of feminine submissiveness I can think of, and it is something critical for most men to learn and be responsible for if they want to have good relations with the opposite sex. So many men are trained to defer to women, and it just frustrates the shit outta women when men do that (I know, because I'm not always a 'dominant' guy - I've been that super-passive, super-'beta' guy, too, as have many of my friends, so I've gotten to see up close and personal how women react to men not taking charge).

Man, I wish everyone could better understand what you just wrote here.

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Feminists try to sweep the agency of female submission under the rug. Right wing researchers claim you can measure sexual interest by the amount of babies they have (Take THAT, egalitarians who tend to favor smaller families!), and bend definitions so they can pretend all attractive behaviors are alpha as Hell in men. (Leaders of men are noted for their lowered heads of shame, right?)

This is the problem when people act from idealism and what they think 'should be' rather than acting from pragmatism and understanding how things are, in the moment.

With feminists pretending submissives don't exist, and anti-feminists pretending women are better off submissive, it's all so painfully stupid and self-serving, that which side you end up on, has more to do with which side's bullshit pissed you off the most.

Agree. That's why I despise idealism, and have little respect for idealists (or cynics, for that matter, who are just idealists with crushed ideals).

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's like they're all suffering broken hearts after their ideals failed them, and if you give them any reason to hope again, watch out!

No shit.

That's why I hate the idea of 'unicorns.'

First, I hate it because it's a 'reason to hope.'

Second, I hate it because it reflects cynicism. There are no unicorns, and that's okay. People are just human, and they all suffer the flaws inherent in being human. There is no magical way you are going to get around that, so it's best to understand what that means and make peace with it.

It's interesting that we're having this conversation, because I feel like it is the same conversation that caused contentiousness for you in the neighboring thread.

At least they're trying to make the world a better place.

In the most ineffective and personally safe way possible. Idealists tend to be as selfish and self-centered as everyone else, only they are pretending not to be and wrap themselves in self-righteousness to avoid confronting that inconvenient little truth.

I have no respect for idealists. Having been one myself, I totally get it, and I won't necessarily shit on them for it, but I won't respect them until they learn how to actually make a difference in the world and risk themselves to do so.

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That's why I hate the idea of 'unicorns.'

Having been someone's unicorn, I'm just going to chalk them up to being someone you crush on, that you couldn't have.

So, they still seem perfect. You never fall out of the honeymoon phase.

Not without making a serious effort, anyways. So much over compensation...

People are just human, and they all suffer the flaws inherent in being human.

But those flaws vary. For example, I'm a giver. If I don't keep it in check, I'll absolutely destroy myself trying to win other people's momentary joy. My entire family shows signs of this - you are not getting out of their house without parting gifts.

We have had ridiculously Normon Rockwell moments together, unironically.

At the same time, my well meaning grandma believes everything Rush Limbaugh tells her. My favorite uncles and an aunt will all die virgins. My otherwise completely awesome geek mom is ridiculously judgmental of recreational sex, and is also, of late, an annoying cynic. Her side of the family has never spent a day in jail, but do you care to guess how many of us were victims?

Our terrifying co-dependency is too pure for you to understand, mud bloods!

If it wasn't for my dad's side of the contribution - just as generous, but completely uninhibited...

Anyways, finding our way to a happy medium is something that most people struggle their entire lives to achieve. And some people do manage it. As a species, we are more than our flaws.

Even if sensitive folks would be pretty horrified by what goes on in our imaginations.

It's interesting that we're having this conversation, because I feel like it is the same conversation that caused contentiousness for you in the neighboring thread.

I can't stand when frustrated idealists aren't self-aware. The very first thing most of them do, is tell me my problems don't exist.

In the most ineffective and personally safe way possible. Idealists tend to be as selfish and self-centered as everyone else, only they are pretending not to be and wrap themselves in self-righteousness to avoid confronting that inconvenient little truth.

True.

I have no respect for idealists. Having been one myself, I totally get it, and I won't necessarily shit on them for it, but I won't respect them until they learn how to actually make a difference in the world and risk themselves to do so.

Amen.

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

[–]nemma8830/F/UK INFP -t. Engaged4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Everyone is manipulative. Every single socially able human being manipulates others whenever they open their mouths.

I think you are pointing to one of the biggest differences in paradigm between BPers and (at least thoughtful) RPers. It's also the difference between idealism and pragmatism.

I fully accept that human beings are manipulative every time they open their mouths. I also accept that they lack inherent (natural) integrity, that they tend to be myopic, that they are aggressive and are often most aggressive and hurtful towards the ones they love, and are all around very flawed creatures. And that's totally okay. That stuff is just as much a part of what it is to be human as all the altruistic and beautiful things they are capable of doing. Being inherently flawed doesn't mean someone is 'bad', it means they are human.

Ridiculous pop culture reference, but this conversation always reminds me of the great wisdom of Captain Jack Sparrow, lol:

The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can’t do. For instance, you can accept that your father was a pirate and a good man or you can’t. But pirate is in your blood, boy, so you’ll have to square with that some day. And me, for example, I can let you drown, but I can’t bring this ship into Tortuga all by me onesies, savvy? So, can you sail under the command of a pirate, or can you not?

We all have to, at some point, square with the pirate in our blood.

[–]GroovyEFS1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm getting that framed and hung up on my wall.

I'm gonna sound corny and cheesy as hell, but I actually admire the shit out of the character of Jack Sparrow. The writers really did imbue him with some really profound and unexpected wisdom. I think that is why that character really took hold in the public imagination.

I mean, Jack Sparrow is the ultimate alpha, I would say, lol...

makes you more vulnerable to those with more malicious intent.

I'll take it one step further...

I've done a lot of self-actualization work over a couple of decades (not so's you'd notice given my life right now, but we all have our challenges). If you don't 'square with the pirate in your blood', you won't be able to accomplish all the 'good' that you would accomplish. Until you come to terms with the fact that you are, by nature, a lying, cheating, manipulative, selfish asshole who sells himself and everyone else short all the time and hurts himself and everyone else around him all the time, you can't be responsible for that part of your nature. And until you can be fully responsible for that part of your nature (not in an 'yeah, I'm bad' way, but in an amoral 'yep, that's how I am' way), it will always have power and control over you.

It's the basic promise of stoicism - you will have emotions, but you can train yourself to not allow them to have you.

[–]GroovyEFS1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

'm gonna sound corny and cheesy as hell, but I actually admire the shit out of the character of Jack Sparrow. The writers really did imbue him with some really profound and unexpected wisdom. I think that is why that character really took hold in the public imagination.

I agree, and in fact a lot of pop-culture characters are far deeper than most people like to give them credit for.

I mean, Jack Sparrow is the ultimate alpha, I would say, lol...

I'd say he has strong alpha traits, but also some beta traits which is what makes him likeable. The Joker is more of a pure alpha because he's just straight up evil and gives no fucks about anyone.

And yet it is interesting how even The Joker has remained so popular, isn't it? I think this links back to exactly what you're saying, it's an expression of the dark side of human nature in a way, and that kind of thing gets people interested even if they have no redeeming qualities to make up for it.

This is also why so many people have a fascination for real life serial killers etc.

Until you come to terms with the fact that you are, by nature, a lying, cheating, manipulative, selfish asshole who sells himself and everyone else short all the time and hurts himself and everyone else around him all the time, you can't be responsible for that part of your nature. And until you can be fully responsible for that part of your nature (not in an 'yeah, I'm bad' way, but in an amoral 'yep, that's how I am' way), it will always have power and control over you.

Agreed entirely. You have to accept all of who you are, the good and the bad, and make peace with it.

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You have to accept all of who you are, the good and the bad, and make peace with it.

Most people are more than willing to accept the good in themselves, since that is how we like to see ourselves, lol.

And, to be fair, that 'good self' (and I use the term 'good' loosely - it's not necessarily being a 'good boy' or a 'good girl') does usually represent who we aspire to be.

It's just that we will never be who we aspire to be until we understand and accept our starting position, namely, that we're also really 'shitty'*, lol.

If you, for example, understand just how fucking manipulative you are all the time as a human being, you can A) use that manipulative behavior to ends of your choosing, rather than being taken along for the ride by your ego, B) recognize just how fucking manipulative others are such that they cease to exert such power over you, and C) make peace with the fact that others are constantly doing the same manipulative bullshit that you do all the time such that you don't waste time being angry at them (or yourself) and making them (or yourself) wrong for shit that is just part of being human. You get to put your energies towards shit that actually can make a difference (expecting humans to stop being human will never make a difference).

*Not actually shitty, just human.

[–]GroovyEFS1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The 48 laws of power is simplistic bullshit.

Conceal your intentions

The voices know what'll happen. Besides, you're the only person in the entire junior high with basic pattern recognition. Use the power. Hisss.

Court attention at all cost

Everyone loves a "Look at me!"

Get others to do the Work for you, but Always Take the Credit

It worked miracles for Atari.

Make other People come to you – use Bait if Necessary

The teenage edgelord version of "Be interesting." and "It's better to see where other people are coming from, than to assume."

Infection: Avoid the Unhappy and Unlucky

How is that working out for the narcissistic assholes who didn't succeed? There's a difference between not letting yourself be pulled under by the drowning, and making short sighted decisions that'll bite you in the ass when you need a helping hand.

Learn to Keep People Dependent on You

I thought were supposed to avoid the needy? This is great advice if you're otherwise horrible to be around, I suppose. Which, if you follow all of these rules to the letter, you will be!

Use Selective Honesty and Generosity to Disarm your Victim

Well, this explains why you desperately need to rebrand honesty and generosity as manipulative.

I could keep going. Just because the limits of anti-feminist thought are "Us do everything opposite! What am bad am now good!" doesn't make it any less stupid.

[–]GroovyEFS1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GroovyEFS 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (63 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MuhLurky points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]MuhLurky points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]MuhLurky points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]LeaneGenovaBreaker of (comment) Chains[M] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]EchoZeroEleven2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NalkaNalka2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NalkaNalka2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NalkaNalka2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NalkaNalka2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NalkaNalka2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NalkaNalka1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NalkaNalkayou call it virtue, I call it cowardice-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NalkaNalka1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NalkaNalka0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So neither gets what they want ever?

Also why are you making so many assumptions? It's not putting a foot down, jesus you have a paranoia about power and abuse.

The dynamic we have is she wants to do things that I like and I want to do things that she likes.

For example she knows I don't like sushi and that I like pizza, I know that she is meh about pizza but likes sushi.

So when it's time to decide what we are going to have for lunch she will say "lets go have pizza" and I will say "lets go have sushi" because we each want the other to be happy and enjoy their meal.

When we are gridlocked ike that I will take charge and make the call so we don't spend the next 10 minutes being annoyingly cute. I'll try to mix it up and alternate doing what she wants with what I want t get the best result for both of us.

You really don't understand leadership. It's not a drill Sargent barking orders. It's someone who takes all the groups wants and needs into consideration and brokers a conclusion and a plan of action that is best for everyone. He doesn't always get it right but that beats people hashing things out indefinitely unable to make a decision about anything

A large portion of people want a leader, they want someone to take charge and make the call so they don't have to*.

I have passive friends who will waffle there for an hour waiting for someone to take charge and decide what bar we are going to.

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NalkaNalka1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NalkaNalka2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NalkaNalka1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lynx_and_nutmeg0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't have a problem with this concept on its own. I have a problem with the idea that it must always be men who get to be the "Captain" and women can only be "first mates".

Also - I don't agree with this concept when taken to an extreme, which is often is in Red Pill. No matter whether it's a man or a woman assuming either role, I think the best relationship is where two people are a team, they pull equal weight in the relationship, help each other when in need. Nobody wants to (or is capable of) making decisions every time. Even the strongest person can't stay "the rock" all the time, they have their weak or tired days as well. Why not just support each other as equals? One time one spouse is better suited to make that specific decision; the other time the other spouse might be better suited. One person could be better suited for domestic or childcare decisions while the other for budget decisions, etc. Nobody is the best expert on everything.

[–]EchoZeroElevenPursuing Answers to Unknown Questions0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RenzololPurple Pill Man-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Circlesquare1 points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]squidracer 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]winndixie2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ercole-- points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GridReXXit be like that12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]GinSmokeLies 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ercole-- points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GridReXXit be like that1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]VermiciousKnidzzBlue Pill Man2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ercole-- points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ercole-- 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ercole-- 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Ercole-- 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrel3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrel5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mashakosMastered Himself, Mastered The Pussy1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]anneomoly0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Define needs.

Part of my needs is having my voice heard, and a say in my own life.

Of course! Ultimately you choose the Captain you capture. If he doesn't give you your needs, why would you stay with him in the first place?

A life where I couldn't make decisions without permission is not a life where my needs are being met. A relationship where my SO couldn't accept that my thoughts, feelings, and opinions were just as valid as his, or a relationship where mutual compromise and joint decisions were off the table, would not meet my needs.

I understand how that would feel, and it's certainly not the dynamic that's desired. You would feel like a prisoner that was being neglected, certainly not the goal, nor what brings the best out of a woman or relationship.

Think of it more like guidance than ruling with an iron fist, and you trusting the guidance. You'd still be expected to make sure the guidance is sound too.

So by definition a captain/first mate dynamic, where I'm treated as a mere subordinate, automatically doesn't meet my needs.

This isn't the definition of Captain/First Mate, that's a Dictator, not a Captain.

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

But neither should women focus on finding a man because they "need" to be taken care of, IMO.

Just for fun...why not? Why 'shouldn't' they, if that is what works for them?

I take care of my wife in all kinds of ways. I'm sure that, if she had to, she could do all the shit that I do. But why would she, when she can count on me to do it, and possibly even do it better than she could (which, incidentally, is why she got with me in the first place - I could make things happen for her that she had trouble making happen for herself)?

Now, you can say that it is potentially damaging to depend on someone else in life. What if something happens to the person you were depending on? Well, if something does happen to the person you were depending on, you're right back to where you would have been anyway, without them, right? You haven't really lost anything you had initially by depending on someone else, you just won't have that person's contribution anymore.

When this particular captain 'got drunk' (search the 'drunk captain' analogy if you are unfamiliar with the term), my wife felt she could no longer depend on me and had to take over the ship/sail her own ship. So she essentially reverted to living in the relationship how she has always lived on her own outside of our relationship. She just doesn't get to enjoy the value-add that my leadership brought to our relationship.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm sure your wife is dependent on you because she chooses to be, not because she needs to be. I think that's an important distinction.

Of course.

I read somewhere (else, not RP, lol) recently that men and women are currently being taught so much about how to be independent that they never learn how to be functionally dependent. That is why, IMO, so many couples buckle or outright fail when the mounting pressures and responsibilities of adulthood and family life start really weighing on them. Under duress, people usually revert to living from what they most know and are most comfortable with. On top of that, being independent is easy compared to developing functional dependency, which requires much more of 'the best in us.' So if what someone most knows and is most comfortable with is independence, and that is also the easier route, they will not be up to the task of tackling those big life issues that require actual dependency and real partnership.

[–]Electra_CuteChristian, Flat Earther, Anti-Vaxxer, Astrologer4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (76 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (75 children) | Copy Link

[–]Electra_CuteChristian, Flat Earther, Anti-Vaxxer, Astrologer3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (73 children) | Copy Link

[–]future_space_boobs 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (72 children) | Copy Link

[–]Electra_CuteChristian, Flat Earther, Anti-Vaxxer, Astrologer4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

[–]MuhLurky points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Electra_CuteChristian, Flat Earther, Anti-Vaxxer, Astrologer5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]MuhLurky points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]lollygagyoSociopathic Fake Flirter2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]lollygagyo2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lollygagyo2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lollygagyo2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lollygagyo2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lollygagyo2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lollygagyo2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I agree. That often happens. And it's find that it does, but you have to understand the implications of that in some situations.

unless you're operating in a formal hierarchical structure.

The number one problem with this whole C/FM conversation (and with TRPers in general, I find) is this tendency to want to look at everything in terms of 'shoulds' and 'right/wrong.' It leads to wanting to 'codify' roles into 'formal hierarchical structures', which for me is idealistic and not at all pragmatic (which is how I see RP). I blame the all the apparent traditionalists who infest RP.

Designating the man as the de facto 'leader' of a marriage is less about leadership (and the respect that engenders) and more about authoritarianism, which I have no use for.

As a man, I would say that, while the power dynamic can and will shift at times in the relationship, it behooves me to stay out ahead of that dynamic such that I'm 'on top' as much as possible. Not because I 'should' be there, not because some 'natural law' says I am the better person to be there, not because men are superior to women or some other such happy horseshit, but because I know that, if I'm out front and leading and 'protecting and providing' and performing and impressing, I'm going to be commanding and inspiring respect from my wife.

And if I'm commanding and inspiring respect from my wife, she is going to feel attracted to me and aroused by me, which means that not only will my sex life be awesome, but she's going to feel awesome in the relationship, she is less likely to get anxious and antsy and combative and bitchy, and our relationship in general is going to go swimmingly for everyone involved.

[–]lollygagyo2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

otherwise it's just not right.

I literally don't give a shit about what is 'right' and what isn't. This isn't about right and wrong, or about values, or about 'traditionalism', or about any other kind of ideology. I realize that many BPers probably get thrown by all the hand-wringing moralizing that so many TRPers love to engage in, but realize that they are engaging in futility. RP is amoral. There is no 'right' and 'wrong'. There is what works, and what doesn't work. That is the only question I'm concerned with.

And, IME, what works is for a man to command the respect of his wife. How he does that is up to him, but from everything I've ever learned through experience, observation, discussion, and study, respect is critical to female desire. No respect, no attraction, no desire, shitty marriage.

One way a man can command and inspire respect is to be a great strong leader in his marriage (and his life). Does he have to be? Is it 'right' for him to be? No. It's just that weak, indecisive, ineffectual husbands tend to inspire contempt, and a woman's contempt is a sure marriage-killer.

That's why there is a complaint. Being a great strong leader can be a challenge, and some days you just wish you could shrug off having to be that. And you can, of course (it's a free country), but you run the risk of creating resentment and contempt and nuking your sex life and possibly your whole marriage.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]lollygagyoSociopathic Fake Flirter2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

[–]future_space_boobs 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]future_space_boobs 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]future_space_boobs 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming-2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

The average woman is great at nothing outside of the female domain or whatever her work is. Really, that's not even true for the average woman but most women.

So then? What would I trust a woman for over myself decision wise?

Not to even account for logic.

I value a woman's input in decision making because women will see outlier situations more readily than I will, but judging what to do is usually better done by the man.

Now if the man has bad logic and/or judgement skills, that's an entirely different problem, and such a man is practically a child in that way and will rely on his woman for judgement, often making her more motherly feeling too.

With smarter and more capable/masculinized women, they can be relied on more, but even then, unless the man is dumber or less masculine, why would that be necessary?

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]sublimemongrel2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

A woman should choose a man that's more logical than her. If she doesn't, she can't trust him to lead her and make better decisions!

This is only true for women who want him to make the decisions for her. And also, I think you're vastly overestimating the differences in logical ability here. Most of the time you aren't going to see such a dramatic difference, much less one that will actually effect joint decisions.

In every relationship I've been in, it's been pretty negligible. And in my marriage, we make those decisions together. My least logical stage is when we are fighting, which usually isn't about a conflict of decision-making anyway. And the way around this is that we both just calm down, step away from it, come back to it the next day and then we can both approach it more logically. OTOH, when we are both fucked up, my husband is the least logical (lol). Best for me to make basic decisions then (like transportation).

I don't recollect any past decisions where I think back and believe that one partner (myself included) made an illogical suggestion when we were facing a joint decision.

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomdplume1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]grindlegrundle 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]grindlegrundle 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GridReXXit be like that2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]GridReXXit be like that1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Do you view her as more or less competent than you?

Or equally competent?

Less, but she's still quite competent. With my guidance she can basically do anything. This girl spent a lot of time growing up in the city and in farms, rural areas.

Shes the type of woman that enjoys wandering forests alone, very strong willed.

IME a woman is only going to relinquish agency over the day to day and big decisions in her life if she fully trusts your competency AND/OR if she simply has no desire to deal with minutia OR if she's literally incompetent.

She fully trusts my competency and has little desire to deal with minutia.

I ask because in several comments you state that women don't have the capabilities to lead but then your also say some are fully capable and simply don't want to.

Where does your SO lie?

I never said all women can't lead, they don't typically want to. My SO can lead, but rather not. She will however when in a group and no one else is leading when necessary.

[–]GridReXX2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GridReXX2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Apexk93 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Apexk90 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Apexk90 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]statsfoddernot blue, not red.1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]KrispyMcSockingtonPillar of the community1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

From what I have seen, it doesn't work that way. Women get to have a say and the captain doesn't oppress his first mate.

Look at the way captains treat their second in command. Kirk would be hopeless without Spock, Picard and Riker were a good team, Janeway and Chakotay trusted each other even if they didn't always see eye to eye.

I think BPers have this impression of the dynamic that men will always get their way because they would not consider anyone else's wishes but their own. The dynamic does not mean ignore everyone and be a selfish prick. Wives have every right to leave if they feel abused and, because of how often men get screwed in family court, if she left she gets custody half of everything, some alimony and child payments. It is not in his best interest to make her leave by being selfish.

At present women are leaving so men are trying to figure out what makes them stay. Women don't explicitly state what it is so guys kinda have to guess. Sometimes women give bad advice and it makes things worse. No gentlemen, doing more housework won't bring her libido back.

So if he takes the lead, takes responsibility off her shoulders and makes all the tough decisions including suffering the consequences, she is protected from all the bad stuff that could happen and she benefits from the good stuff. Now, if you told someone they could live a life free from worry, they never have to be responsible for major decisions but they do get a say in matters, it doesn't sound like a bad idea. If hubby earns enough that she gets to live a good life (picture a comfy home, good spending money and time to pursue your own hobbies) I doubt anyone would complain. They have a good thing going. This is idealistic but it is a far cry from the image of a husband and father as a dictator, terrorising those at home.

I don't know where everyone got this myth from that guys are abusers just waiting to strike, but most dads and husbands want a happy family. So much so that they become doormats trying to please everyone and, ironically, it chases partners away. So they are trying something that may work if she is willing to submit. When he submits, she finds it unattractive and if neither choose to submit, you have power struggles.

it seems to me as though they're saying they can't be happy unless they have complete control over their relationship.

Men are happy to let women lead if it didn't turn women off or it didn't become a shit show for men. Women don't spoil or try to please men who are in a weaker position than they are, not for long anyway. Otherwise unemployed men would be pretty happy. By contrast, a man does not mind taking care of his wife if he is able to financially. The problem is that most homes today require two incomes and thus both couples must work to keep things going. Women would prefer more time off for family, though, and there is nothing wrong with that. But a stay at home dad is not a viable option if they want the relationship to last.

Egalitarian relationships do work but they require both parties to be willing to compromise. But due to men's desire to please coupled with bad relationship advice and a feminine approach to raising and teaching boys, they are not always able to say no to women. If he keeps giving in, she will keep getting her way and any semblance of equality slowly fizzles away. She will still believe things are equal or okay when he may be struggling. If he dares to complain he gets little to no love, but she gets great emotional support when she has issues ("Happy Wife, Happy Life", and "If you can't handle me at my worst...").

Finally, should we not leave it to women to decide? For men it is tougher because they have to meet higher standards and keep her happy to get some physical intimacy. But women have the freedom and state backed power to choose. If they choose to be a first mate, and can choose to leave if they are unhappy, what is the problem? Take note, I do not support an abusive relationship. But being considered in decisions, having a strong, ambitious partner who loves you and takes responsibility doesn't sound bad. If it works for them then so be it. If indeed she works, I doubt he takes her money and leaves her with nothing nor would a decent captain deny her opportunities to be happy.

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]IIHotelYorbatreats objects like women1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]IIHotelYorbatreats objects like women1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AutoModeratorBiased against humans[M] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

[–]rulenumber3038 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]dakruNeither3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]EliteSpartanRangerNice Guys Don't Ask For Rewards1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnarchkittyBetter dead than Red3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GinSmokeLies 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]GridReXXit be like that2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]GinSmokeLies 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Changes4175 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Changes4175 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GridReXXit be like that1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]GinSmokeLies 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]GridReXXit be like that1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun[M] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun[M] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun[M] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Boobear30 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mashakosMastered Himself, Mastered The Pussy0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]tplg 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Do you realize that it's impossible for the man to lead the relationship if the wife doesn't want him to? In a captain/first mate dynamic men don't force women to follow them (that would be an abusive relationship), but rather women choose to trust and respect their man to make the important decisions.

They carefully choose their partners to end up with someone who is reliable and trustworthy enough to defer to and then choose to follow his lead. Men are carefully vetted to make sure they will not abuse the power they are given, or use it against them. And if he would start misusing the power he has been given there's nothing that stops the woman from leaving. There's nothing infantilizing about that. In fact I feel your assumption that we defer because we're not allowed to have an equal say (rather than because we choose to defer) is way more infantilizing, because it implies that women cannot stand up for themselves or make their own decision.

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]tplg 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't know about religious communities/evangelicals and what they do, but indoctrination is not related to the captain/first mate dynamic in any way, nor is it related to your CMV post.

What I'm saying is that C/FM is about choice. Not about force, not about what you're taught, just about choice and personal preference and, most of all, trust. It's not C/FM unless women can walk away as easily as men can make decisions within the relationship. And walking away easily includes doing so without any guilt and without (more than normal) backlash from friends and family.

The moment a woman is shamed into submitting to her husband it's not a C/FM relationship. If he forces her to stay with him and do as he tells her it's an abusive relationship, not a C/FM one.

It's only C/FM if she chooses to defer to him because she wants to and because it makes her happy, and he acknowledges that her deferring is a (earned) gift, not a given.

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bostonbob19870 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]bostonbob19870 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]beachblokeThat sandwich won't make itself pill0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]theiamsamuraiRavishment Realist0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]goatismycopilotPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]mashakosMastered Himself, Mastered The Pussy3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

I often see Red pill/"alpha' males describe their relationship as captain and first mate and not male dominance. However as captain the male has final say and therefor control over the marriage/relationship. If a man can't allow the woman to have equal say/control in the marriage it seems to me as though they're saying they can't be happy unless they have complete control over their relationship.

No matter what the man says the woman can then deny him sex. If she feeds him she can deny him her food. If they have children and are married she can threaten divorce. Not to mention she can be a giant pain in the ass if she wants to be too.

Women have the ultimate power and men must give in or the relationship ends.

A man a woman doesn't have some control over is effectively useless to her.

You're also expecting having equal say is what makes women happy, this is wrong, they don't care about equality over getting what they need from the relationship and feeling good overall.

[–]AnarchkittyBetter dead than Red6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ascimatorsmirks audibly1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ascimatorsmirks audibly0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]SetConsumesAlways Becoming0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jonascf0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]StudntRdyTeachrApearThug Passion Pill0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ppdthrowawaiRed Pill-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]ppdthrowawaiRed Pill-2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GridReXXit be like that4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]ppdthrowawaiRed Pill0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]GridReXXit be like that1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]ppdthrowawaiRed Pill0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]GridReXXit be like that1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]ppdthrowawaiRed Pill0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I'm not explaining what I like about it. I'm explaining how couples who have this type of setup see their own relationships.

Let me put it to you this way: I run a business. My role is very important and all my decisions are final because my name is on the building and I am the one liable if anything goes wrong. If an employee dissents, they risk losing the job I gave them the privilege of having. The business does not function without me.

That being said, my office manager runs the business. She knows the way I like it to be done and I know the ways in which she is more knowledgeable than myself. My decisions still trump hers but in general I defer judgement. She has a considerable amount of power in choosing which products we sell, how we market our business, all the money passes through her hands (and mine), she can hire and fire, and has the power to do anything that doesn't require a license for her to do. She knows what's going on more than I do and is an extremely integral part of a business that also does not function without her. The fact that I'm still the boss and retain 100% power over her has very little to do with her agency. We both agreed to these terms when I hired her.

These setups in relationship are not much different. Highly functional people happy in their particular roles.

[–]GridReXXit be like that2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ppdthrowawai1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GridReXX2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ppdthrowawai1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daniel_Bryan_Fan2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ppdthrowawai1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]alreadyredschoolRational egoism < Toxic idealism-1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Randommorningkiller -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

CMV: Parent/child ideology is just a polite way of saying I can't be happy in a relationship unless I have my way 100% of the time.

I often see Mother/Father/"guardian' people describe their relationship as parent and child and not father/mother dominance. However as parent the father/mother has final say and therefor control over the dynamic/relationship. If a mother/father can't allow the offspring to have equal say/control in the relationship it seems to me as though they're saying they can't be happy unless they have complete control over their relationship.

A little exaggerated, but it follows. If you are generally better at decision making and have a more logical outlook, why would you make the decision process equal? You can take suggestions for the other person's feelings to be acknowledged, but ultimately you have to make the best decision regardless of what feels good. Sometimes a decision isn't that important and you can leave it to their choice, sometimes the outcomes aren't that different and you can leave it to their choice, but you don't make it a split process.

It's not about getting your way, it's about caring about someone enough to not let them have what they want at times.

[–]Daniel_Bryan_FanBlue Pill Man[S] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Randommorningkiller 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	CMV: Captain/first mate ideology is just a polite way of saying I can't be happy in a relationship unless I have my way 100% of the time.
Author	Daniel_Bryan_Fan
Upvotes	28
Comments	523
Date	February 15, 2017 8:05 PM UTC (9 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/5u9wah/cmv_captainfirst_mate_ideology_is_just_a_polite/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/cmv-captainfirst-mate-ideology-is-just-a-polite.270070 https://theredarchive.com/post/270070

Comments