Female submission. What is it? How is it different from an equal partnership? Can you provide real-world examples of it? Do you want it?

Anantha1996 · 2021-08-15T23:22:01+00:00

I agree. Every time I corner a RP guy on this, it boils down to agreeableness rather than submission.

NarniaFox · 2021-08-16T04:06:52+00:00

I asked a lot about it and I've never really got any well articulated answer. I guess there are two common approaches among men who claim that they want a submissive partner:

Some men just want an agreeable partner and they think that it makes their partner submissive. Or maybe they want someone who never contradicts them, I'm not sure
Some men claim that there's always a leader in relationships and it's a male position of authority/power

Personally I don't agree with either of them. Agreeableness != submission and there are relationships without a "leader/captain" in them. If some people can't properly discuss issues, make compromises, see their partner as an equal and treat them accordingly, make plans together so they'd work for both of them, these are their own issues.

My husband and I have egalitarian marriage. We discuss things and decide them together. Sure, we have different areas of competence and we often rely on each other to make a good decision, but we still generally discuss all of the important ones.

tiposk · 2021-08-16T00:37:26+00:00

Submission is exactly what the definitions you cite show. A submissive woman is one who is led by her man and lets him have the final say. The disclaimers used by those who advocate submission such as "it's not about being a doormat" are just mental gymnastics by those who don't want to admit that submission implies inferiority.

Gilmoregirlin · 2021-08-16T03:15:15+00:00

This is exactly how my partner and I operate and when I tell the men on here this they argue incessantly with me that one person still has to be the more dominant one then one more in control even if it’s by 10%. I ask the question why and the answers I get are because that’s just how it is? That’s a male way of thinking . Someone is in charge, everything is competitive. Women are collaborative. I am a lawyer and I see it play out in work styles all the time.

I’ve also dated men before I met my husband who were constantly trying to compete with me to gain the upper hand and it was so exhausting. In times past men felt in control as they had money now they don’t. I have female friends who let their husbands believe they are in control and that may be the modern way for some men, maybe just trick them? Personally to me that’s also exhausting!

techr0nin · 2021-08-16T03:21:33+00:00

I only really care about submissiveness in the bedroom — I like the feeling of being dominant and in charge, and I enjoy it when women try to please me. Otherwise yes both partners probably each have their strengths and weakness and they ideally complement each other.

That said I also can’t imagine myself giving up control of finances. My wife did object at one point and I gave her a small chunk of money to manage, and she barely beats the market. So now she sticks to making budgets and filing taxes. However my extended family is full of dominant women that are whizes at managing money, and they somehow make their relationships work. So there is definitely no one single way to do it.

orangerose18 · 2021-08-16T06:14:25+00:00

I’m a submissive woman in my relationships with men. Quite frankly, I don’t want to have make decisions. I tend to get caught up in minutiae and get anxious if I have to make too many decisions. Dominant men don’t seem to have that issue. I don’t care about 90% of things that happen so long as I’m safe, employed/employable, able to eat healthy food, and with my partner and have access to my friends. I don’t care if I’m living in Seattle or Austin, suburb or urban, driving a Prius or a Tesla, etc. It brings me joy to know that someone else wants to take care of me and make decisions that are beneficial for me to spare me the stress of it all. I naturally derive pleasure from the pleasure of my loved ones. If I had a preference for pizza one night and my boyfriend wanted Chinese, I’d yield to his preference because making him happy would bring me the same amount of pleasure (even more tbh) as getting the pizza I initially wanted. Although sometimes if I’ve yielded too many times to his preference without complaint a considerate bf will notice and go with my opinion.

A dominant, gentle man makes me feel safe and loved and warm and fuzzy more than men who act egalitarian. I don’t think of it as myself having less worth than the man. I think of it as us being two different beings suited to different roles. I’m a good follower and he’d have to be a good leader for me to be willing to follow him. I bring sweetness and softness and he brings strength and fortitude. I’d want to give my life in support of his and he’d be willing to lay down his life for me at a moment’s notice — more practically providing for my wellness and protecting me from unpleasantness or scary situations that I’m sensitive to.

As a woman who grew up in a very liberal area I think part of this submission may stem from a childhood cut short. I had to take on more responsibilities than I was ready for at a young age. Giving up responsibilities in some areas is a luxury that I want in a long term relationship, and in return I’d give my full support and submission. Submission is relaxing and safe with a man I’ve vetted well and trust.

Honestly I advocate this only for myself. As a societal model I don’t think it’s right.

Hoopy223 · 2021-08-15T23:48:11+00:00

Most guys just want someone who is easy to get along with. Coming home to a bullshit argument sucks.

midwestufohunter · 2021-08-16T00:14:01+00:00

I think it’s fawn response and being abused and having no other ideas about life than coddling men in exchange for survival.

IntegrityDJones · 2021-08-16T07:32:42+00:00

Never met a man who advocated for it who wasn’t abusive and single (and not single by choice). I find these men fail at everything in life, and want to have someone’s neck to step on to feel like a “man”.

Most can’t even tell you what a submissive woman is, without making her seem like a slave or a doormat. They’ll try desperately to change the definition of submissive to make it seem not that bad, but always comes down to wanting a doormat.

They can’t cut it as men, so in a last failed attempt, they treat women as less to try to feel like they’re in charge and have something going for them.

Perseus_the_Bold · 2021-08-16T03:08:14+00:00

Submission is nothing more than deferring to someone else's authority and in the case of men and women it simply means she defers to the man's authority. But here is the rub: She will only do so if his authority if legitimized through competence. Women won't just trust any old fool to take the lead role in their relationship. This is why women have standards.

The problem arises when women do not feel like subordinating themselves to a man or when men themselves do not feel like bearing the burden of responsibility that comes with being in charge.

The natural balance wold then occur when there is a less stringent role for each party and one where men can step aside when a woman is more up to the role or when she steps aside when the man is more up to the role. It takes two to pilot this type of ship and whoever the pilot is they can hand over the helm to their co-pilot at any time.

I have never been interested in submissive women and I was never interested in being completely in charge of a relationship, that is part of the reason I am MGTOW. I refuse to take charge of someone else's life or to have someone else be in charge of mine.

AquaChip · 2021-08-16T13:59:42+00:00

The men who claim they want a dominant/ submissive relationship structure would regret saying it if it every became popular because those are the men who wouldn’t be picked.

An actual dominant, masculine, competent, respectful and kind man is rare and they would be the only ones being picked and the fake red pill alphas would be left behind.

Willow-girl · 2021-08-16T14:24:29+00:00

The average wife is happy if her husband can get his socks in the hamper. She's over-the-moon if he can manage to watch all the kids (even the baby!) for a couple of hours while she runs errands. Women blessed with husbands who can do this often brag to their friends, who "Ooooooh" in envy.

If you were to suggest that their husbands "dominate" them, they'd probably hurt themselves laughing!

Lotus_82 · 2021-08-16T08:56:20+00:00

Submission = inferiority

And if a guy disagrees, that’s great tell him he can be the submissive one in the relationship and see how he likes it.

Ian_Campbell · 2021-08-16T04:50:38+00:00

I think what it truly is, is a leap of faith. In an act of teamwork it is sort of like a trust fall exercise. So if a wife is submitting to a husband it is sort of like a gamble that by choosing a support role in a way of speaking, he will be more the stronger and motivated and thus by this little collaboration the unit from perspectives of both effectiveness and cohesion, will be stronger.

Is that always best? No. Is it ever best? Seems it has worked for some. I personally think the spirit of this can be captured without a woman giving up too many pragmatic freedoms. It's kind of a mindset of investment probably all married people should have and express in different ways.

Pastelitomaracucho · 2021-08-16T18:24:25+00:00

Submissive: just don't be a confrontational bitch that gets offended about everything and forces me to walk on eggshells

Willow-girl · 2021-08-16T01:28:52+00:00

Well, everyone would like a partner who always agrees with him/her, or at least pretends to, amirite?

Nation_of_Two · 2021-08-16T00:28:06+00:00

I can speak to this, as I am submissive in a healthy LTR. He makes decisions, he drives the car, he leads the relationship. But I chime in and he listens to me because he cares. We just got back from a weekend far away that was my idea, but he decided the rest.

VasiliyZaitzev · 2021-08-16T02:27:29+00:00

But my question is, how is that different than a healthy partnership?

Are you implying that a relationship where one partner "submits" is "unhealthy"?

Why does submission of one partner need to be involved if they both love and respect one another and decisions are made together?

Because the partners WANT it that way.

Your partner may be strong in areas that you are weak, and weak in areas that you are strong, and that is perfectly okay. Can't you be aware of each others strengths and weaknesses and cooperate accordingly?

One can do that within the parameters of a D/s relationship.

Relationships are supposed to be a give and take

Says who?

I believe that submission of one partner makes the relationship unequal and ignores the strengths of the submissive and weaknesses of the dominant partner.

That is your opinion, to which you re entitled, but that does not make it fact.

My personal experience is this: I am a tall, confident, broad-shouldered, dominant man. The women to whom I am attracted and who are attracted to me, have, historically, been sexually submissive (ranging from "want to be tied up in bed" to "want to be my slave girl.") They prefer a "male led" relationship.

I am, incidentally, quite comfortable in more of an "equal" partnership - although none/very few relationships are "equal" - but if taking a Dominant role in a relationship puts me on the Express Train to Pound Town, and results in a happier female (my preference) partner, why would I not? Particularly as I am completely comfortable in a male-led relationship as well.

That does not mean that my various partners do not have expertise in areas I do not. Ex. one is a medical doctor with a very responsible job. Her preference, when we are together and she is on her own time (wrt work) is to be kept in the house, collared, nude, waiting on me hand and foot and deferring to me on virtually all matters. On medical issues, however, her opinion is vastly more expert than mine, and I would rely on it, certainly to the exclusion of my own. On the 1 or 2 occasions that something calling for her expertise has come up when we are together, I could quite literally see her click over into "doctor" mode and address the situation (in one case she correctly diagnosed a neighbor's appendicitis and sent him off to the hospital, and in another she attended to the injured (not too badly) child of a different neighbor.) That said, being treated as a sex slave really rings her bell, and I am able to give her what she needs and keep quiet about it in our personal lives - I will sometimes mention (but not directly threaten) the consequences of exposure, but always add at the end, "but I'll never tell." As far as anyone we know IRL is concerned, we have a conventional relationship.

From what I understand, from her and my other lovers, past and present, they feel good knowing that, no matter what might happen, I will handle things, and thus they can take a vacation from their anxiety , such as it may be. From my POV, anxiety is something (a) that exists, and (b) that other people have. Also, they almost all seem to have someone in their lives (usually when younger) - a parent, an older sibling, a bully at school - that tormented them and "submission" for them is a pantomime in which they "please" the tormentor and resolve the situation. Usually, I can figure out who in their lives this is in short order. In one case, I knew the woman from childhood and in discussing this she wondered aloud who it could be in her life and I replied, "It's your middle sister." Nailed it (the identity, not the sister.)

One final thing for sub missives, putting their orgasm under the Dominant's control can result in more powerful orgasms, depending on what they are capable of and what the Dominant chooses to do.

Note for Those People Who Are Triggered by This Type of Thing: I did not cover here, because it isn't relevent to the answer, but have elsewhere on reddit, that (a) Consent is real thing, and (b) the Dominant/Master is 100% responsible for the health and safety of the person they have tied up/under their control. There's more to it than that, but I didn't want the "OMG! YOU DIDN'T SAY ANTYING ABOUT CONSENT!!! RAYYYYYPIZZZT!!!" Nothing could be further from the truth.

EfficientComputer5 · 2021-08-16T00:30:28+00:00

Didn't bother reading. All that needs to be said is its a dumb meaningless word meant to self empower self righteous indignation and hostility.

_Neon_Shadow_ · 2021-08-16T01:30:50+00:00

Submissive women are overrated and a dime a dozen.

luliloo · 2021-08-16T05:27:05+00:00

I’m quite submissive in my current relationship.

Looking back at past relationships, I was quite combative. I would often think I know better and I’m right. If we didn’t agree on something, it really bothered me. I would want him to walk me through his thought process. “Did you consider this? Why did you choose that? What were the other options?” I wanted collaboration on everything. Boils down to I didn’t respect him enough and I didn’t trust him to make decisions.

Compared to my new guy, it feels totally different. He leads and I follow. I don’t feel the need to question him and I can just trust he knows best. He can instruct me to do something and I’ll do it.

steveblahhh · 2021-08-16T05:17:57+00:00

Hmm. I had a fling earlier this year w/fun. Cambridge-educated feminist.

I'm paraphrasing but one conversation I found rather illuminating was about sex. "sure, support us in the fight against the patriarchy etc but when we're in bed behind closed doors, I expect you (the guy) to take the lead"

So, it isn't domination over this particular woman's eyes, since we both asserted ourselves during the act of sex... The normal give and take of the act but she did defer to me. Submitting her self to my lead.

So, an example of female submission for you. I think in a relationship, there should be a balance in the power dynamic

wateroclock · 2021-08-16T12:23:36+00:00

Do you know how sex works for the overwhelming majority of men and women? Women are submissive. Doesn't mean they always do nothing, or that they can't ask for anything, or that they're degraded for it etc. They are the less active partner that willingly and happily gives most of control to the man and finds most satisfaction when things are mostly that way, their role and niche is feminine, the other half of the whole. Apply this dynamic to relationships and you got it.

WilliamWyattD · 2021-08-16T00:45:05+00:00

It's a matter of leadership. It is supposed to happen naturally. This is why women have a hypergamous impulse: nature wants them to choose a man who is at least a bit better, overall, at leading the relationship. When such a pairing occurs, all that is required of the woman is to not let ego get in the way of the natural dynamic that would occur otherwise.

Really, it's all about the initial pairing. If a woman doesn't choose a man who is more capable than her overall, then it is unnatural for her to let him lead.

The same dynamic occurs in any grouping of people that put their egos aside and are motivated to excel. The one most capable of leading leads the most. The nature of that leadership is determined by the relative capabilities of the people involved.

Human impulses are not necessarily made to be population-level sustainable. A woman wants what she wants for her own benefit. Almost all women are happier in a truly hypergamous pairing where her man is more capable than her in terms of who would be the better 'captain' of the relationship overall. However, this in no way means that it is necessarily possible that all women can pair with such a man. This is part of the innate tension between human nature and wide spread monogamy. On some level, women were meant to only mate with men that were superior to them in this subtle way, and the rest of the men were supposed to die without mating. This is why, IMO, under a paradigm of wide spread monogamy, the idea that ALL women should submit to their husbands or let him lead is problematic, because when you have a pairing where she is better equipped to be the captain, insisting that he lead is unnatural.

Of course all of this is complex. We have other aspects of our nature that are disposed to wide spread monogamy. There are aspects of us that are in tension. But if a woman doesn't pair with a man who would have naturally lead, without any religion or philosophy having to tell them he should lead, then simply telling women they need to submit to him doesn't tend to work. Nor should it.

geyges · 2021-08-16T00:34:28+00:00

I'm not interested in hearing about how God put man above woman.

You say that, but I'm still going to respond with few quotes from Paul in regards to marriage:

Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

..

husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies.

..

However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

Paul continuously makes analogies between submission to god and submission within a relationship. It's true that he compares husband to Jesus and Wife to Church, which puts husband ahead of the wife... but its important to point out that submission should be read more as "duty". And both wife and husband have responsibilities to each other in this regard.

AvatarReiko · 2021-08-16T06:11:09+00:00

There is so much irony here. It is because of these very qualities that make a man attractive to a woman in the first place. No woman really wants to take charge. That is the man’s job. A woman can say anything she wants but the fact is, she will always be emotionally attracted to a dominant, masculine man who is leads. Why? Because her brain is simply hard wired to work that way. “Leadership, confidence, dominance” often indicate strength and good genes”. Ergo, woman naturally look for these traits when they’re weeding out the losers. This is why it simply baffles me when they say they want to be “equal or superior” to the man. A true woman would rather‘sit back’ and allow her man to take her places and give him support on his mission, his purpose. She literally craves a man’s dominance.

Man, 3rd wave feminism has put so many outlandish ideas in women’s heads it’s unreal

WarriorInTheGarden1 · 2021-08-16T03:36:52+00:00

If you don’t even like the word “submissive” then you’re not going to attract a high value man that understands his role. Life is short; you don’t have time to renegotiate every single social and relational contract for your perceived optimal happiness. Odds are your personal wisdom gathered over decades doesn’t outweigh the ages. Men lead while women support and follow that lead. Date until you find a man that you can approve of his leadership style. Life is on easy mode for both of you at that point. Or just try to convince reality to conform to your relatively new vision of relational dynamics, whatever.

AutoModerator · 2021-08-15T23:18:28+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

IndependenceSoft3250 · 2021-08-16T05:07:25+00:00

Important note: When answering these questions, please refrain from using the bible or anything religious. I am not religious, so I'm not interested in hearing about how God put man above woman.

Biblical submission is equal to agreement, translations just vary.

In terms of RP, I've always assumed it was about sex positions.

Outrageous_Energy_65 · 2021-08-16T06:43:33+00:00

a lot of women hate the idea of submitting or thinking themselves as submitting to their partner, because it implies they are inferior or whatever

a way to get around that is to think of yourself as "easygoing" or "go with the flow" vsauce had a video once about the concept of coolness and he said that the modern american concept of coolness came from african slaves who couldn't really rebel against their masters without fear of being beaten, so they just became sort of indifferent and detached from their surroundings, instead of responding to their masters commands with "yes master" it was "ok, sure, whatever man"

that approach *might* help deal with the indignity of assuming the submissive role

decoy88 · 2021-08-16T09:44:19+00:00

Men who come from toxic relationships where women have been total counts assume that’s the norm, and that anything more chill than that is by definition “submissive”

oldmanwinter_68 · 2021-08-16T11:58:39+00:00

In my experience, most women want to be somewhat submissive their man in real life and very submissive in sexual matters. Although the line can be somewhat blurry.

I once had a girlfriend with whom I watched a science fiction movie about a dystopian society in which all women wore slave collars capable of giving them a painful electric shock if they were disobedient. My girlfriend told me she thought that was a pretty good idea.

colinnb · 2021-08-16T17:14:05+00:00

Submission simply means yielding to the man’s authority. Equal partnership is where both man and woman have equal control. The above feminists are moving the goalpost and trying to falsely conflate submission with inferiority. Take for example a child and a father. Neither a child and the father are inferior, as they have the same human dignity. However the father has authority over the child, so the child submit to the father’s will. This is analogous to a the man and a woman, as the natural order of humans is man-woman-child, in that order.

Whisper · 2021-08-16T18:08:06+00:00

But my question is, how is that different than a healthy partnership?

It is a healthy partnership.

Why does submission of one partner need to be involved if they both love and respect one another

Because humans are hardwired that way.

and decisions are made together?

That is a recipe for arguments and conflict.

Relationships are supposed to be a give and take,

Supposed by whom?

I believe that submission of one partner makes the relationship unequal and ignores the strengths of the submissive and weaknesses of the dominant partner.

I agree that you believe that.

oldmanwinter_68 · 2021-08-16T00:19:05+00:00

But my question is, how is that different than a healthy partnership? Why does submission of one partner need to be involved if they both love and respect one another and decisions are made together?

What happens when the two people disagree? For example, what if your child is staying up so late playing online games that the child's schoolwork is suffering? What if the child thinks this is perfectly fine but the child's parent disagrees? In that case, the parent might make a decision that the computer gets turned off at 10pm, period, end of story and the child must submit to the parent's will. This doesn't mean that the parent doesn't love the child, in fact it's the opposite.

So too with the relationship between a man and woman in a long term relationship. The man should make decisions for the benefit of the wife; any children; and himself. The woman should accept his decisions. (Obviously if the man abuses his power, the woman would be within her rights to end the relationship, for example if he blows all his earnings on the proverbial hookers and blow.)

I think most women are happy with such a situation. Certainly every woman who's ever lived with me has had to accept my authority. And I try not to be a jerk about it, at least under normal circumstances. In the bedroom, a lot of women, perhaps a majority, like men to play the role of the cruel and sadistic master.

gimpgirl555 · 2021-08-16T03:17:18+00:00

I have good news and bad news on this topic.

The good news: most men don't want to be in charge anymore.

The bad news: you don't get to be submissive anymore.

Especially for you younger girls, you'll get to be in charge. It'll be great.

DerekMorganBAU · 2021-08-16T13:37:16+00:00

OP is arguing down women who say that they are submissive and happy 😂

Let's be real. Women will NATURALLY submit to a man that they're attracted to when they enter a relationship. Every man here has seen it, I've seen it, it be what it be.

They'll cook for him, clean for him, wash his dirty underwear, etc. And they'll do it HAPPILY.

This is one of those smokescreen topics where a subset of women will swear that they are NOT submissive then log off reddit and ask their man "What do you want me to cook you for dinner?"

Flintblood · 2021-08-16T03:26:23+00:00

To me submissive does not mean lower than. I think many of us use it to offset what we see as a movement that demands that women sweet themselves and become the one “wearing the pants”.

To me submissive means having high agreeableness and being very easy going and not offended by anything you say that isn’t validation. Someone that is rock solid strong inside and sweet feminine charm on the outside.

Master-Edward-3 · 2021-08-16T03:21:26+00:00

I think you know the answers to most of those questions. But men and women simply need to find someone who they are compatible with.

Most men probably prefer a submissive woman and plenty women like the “alpha” that leads. Or maybe women only want some equal partnership with the beta man than an alpha man.

We hear all the time about stepping up or manning up as men so that can be taken as leadership. I feel like since men are mostly said and known to make more decisions based on logic and facts than emotions and how they feel as compared to women then it would make more sense to be under the man’s leadership in most scenarios. Perhaps this would be why we have yet to have a female President of the United States in spite of female influence and equality for some decades now. In addition to more male C.E.O’s than female C.E.O’s or correct in incorrect. Although it seems that typically most men and maybe half or a little over half of women prefer male leadership for some reason subconsciously in the in charge roles.

Now if some women want equal partnership or even G.I. Jane dominatrix I’m sure those similar minded men exist for these women. Just as women that are looking for proactive men to take charge have those minded men out there for them. Birds of a feather. Different strokes for different folks.

I feel like it’s always smoother if the woman is more submissive because more often than not that same woman will eventually contradictorily state how the man needs to man up and take care of her or something about leading into the right path which many women would say is an attractive trait.

lestratege · 2021-08-16T08:42:50+00:00

The definitions you quoted are vague and that's why there's often issues about this whole thing. The meaning of the term is tricky.

First, no matter what you said, the whole submission part comes from Paul, and thus stems from religion. The thing is, the complete quote is wives, submit to your husband and husbands, love your wife.

It's obviously about doing what either tend not to do... Notice that you questioned the same thing (you said "if they both love each other").

About the submission part, which has been recycled in non religious discourse, the problem of the definitions you quoted are the different meanings they show: obeying doesn't mean meekly obedient or passive. The word submission now has these two meanings and that's what most of the issue stems from: people object to the second meaning, while advocates talk about the first.

Obedience in the first meaning is about who should decide in the end. Feminists will say "why should the man decide?", but they fail to argue why women should. So people sidestep the question by saying "cooperation", "together", etc. but this is not answering the question WHO in the end has the last word, it's only describing HOW should a decision be reached. No matter how much input from all, how eager to listen, etc., eventually, ONE person decides, not two.

So who should it be? Why the husband and not the wife?

Well for the very simple reason that Pascal noted about justice and might. In the end, the man can impose his will on the woman, through pure might. The opposite is not true. Responsibility is thus truly on the person who can enforce their will. And between a man and a woman, if their will are opposite, the man can enforce his will at the expense of the woman. The opposite isn't true unless the woman has some other men enforce her will fir her.

Thus, considering this fundamental and unavoidable inequality between the sexes (a big no no to even consider in modern time, but which is truly inescapable), who is responsible? The person who decides and can enforce their will or the one who cannot and must rely on others? Of course, the first kind is fully responsible.

From this, a functioning couple must recognize two things: 1. The man is the one deciding anyway. Either to do what he chooses or to LET his wife choose. 2. For the decisions to be for the benefit of the couple, and not solely for the man, then the husband has to love his wife.

The question of the submission of the wife is thus only about recognizing the actual state of the relation between husband and wife. It's not a choice given to the wife. It's a recognition that must be done by both husband and wife.

In a word: with great power comes great responsibility.

bathwatermerchant · 2021-08-16T09:28:05+00:00

Tbh submissivenes/equality is a very sleazy topic because if you "submissive" but still "have your voice" its not being submissive, its covert power.

Being truly submissive would make a women vulnerable to being walked on by basically everyone-a seller at a small shop selling you spoiled milk, car dealer pushing his worst offer to you, coworkers throwing their workload on you. And I'm not even talking about how being with an abusive partner can lead to health issues or even death.

I'd think that by saying "I want a submissive partner" men are actually saying "I want a partner that won't be a pain in the ass and will allow me to lead her", so its more correct to say that men want a woman that is agreeble and easy to be with.

Women, on the other hand, say things like "I want myself an extremely masculine (tall, muscular,problem-solving, etc) men so I can be feminine and submissive with him, but I still will decide everything and he has to respect me as a strong and independent woman!!1" which is utter self-contradicting bullshit and unicorn hunting. First of all, responsibility without authority is slavery. Then if you can only "be submissive" to a 6ft+ assertive wall of muscles then do you really want to be submissive if you raise your bar so high, or are you just making excuses? And wanting a man like that to act all masculine and traditional, but the moment you say "I'm going out to get drunk as shit with my girlfriends at the night club, while wearing this tiny dress with my boobs and ass out and DON'T YOU DARE TO EVEN THINK ABOUT SAYING ANYTHING" and expecting him to say "yes, honey" is like wtf?

And also I understand the motive behind shittesting (if he can't deal with me, then how can he deal with other men threating me? If he values me more than him, then how can I see him as valuable?), but its still irrational to chop a branch you are sitting on. If anything, a woman must try to make it easier for her man to act masculine, not the opposite.

Jakes1967 · 2021-08-16T09:40:32+00:00

Female submission. What is it? How is it different from an equal partnership? Can you provide real-world examples of it? Do you want it?

In our household, I am the head of the household.

Does that mean I'm in charge? No, it simply means that things that require a final answer are mine to decide over.

Basically I'm just the final coordinator for the family. My wife still makes the bulk of decisions and where a large expenditure is required, I'll review it. She's the head of the house and I respect her as such.

Lateralanouncer · 2021-08-16T11:17:10+00:00

It’s a sexual strategy. Woman are hypergamous. Date up. If she thinks she is equal to you she will not find you sexually attractive.

Aldabruzzo · 2021-08-16T15:05:32+00:00

I'll answer this however I deem fit.

Submission means cooperative and does what I ask. It means I break the ties. It means I have the final say on major life decisions and courses of action.

It does NOT mean I micromanage her life. It does NOT mean I tell her everything to do or even everything I should do. It does NOT mean she cannot disagree with me. It does NOT mean I use physical force to get my way.

It is NOT about competition. If you have to force a woman into submission, she's not attracted to you. If a woman has to force a man into submission, she's a cunt who should be cut out of your life.

Female submission works better because both men and women want it that way. Women don't like leading and they aren't good at it.

Submission is necessary. There is no way to have an egalitarian relationship. They don't work. It's an impossibility. An egalitarian relationship means everything is exactly equal. Just does not work. It cannot work. In every relationship between 2 people, one is the dominant, and the other is submissive.

Glitchy_Toast · 2021-08-16T22:05:08+00:00

Many people, including myself, do not like the use of this word because it (seems to) suggest that a women is lower than a man in a relationship...

Most, if not all, women actively seek out men they view as being "worth more". Not to say that the man holds inherent value over the woman, but bringing more into the relationship than her. Hypothetically, if a woman was to make 100K a year, she expects a man to make more. This is just one aspect but if women are looking for household leaders, then why is there turmoil when said leaders LEAD their household?

Genuinely curious. From my perspective, it sounds like American women want the benefit of a wealthier or "more valuable" man without paying the cost (subordination).

If the ideal man (to women) is a man of greater value. Then what is the issue with the ideal woman (to men), being subordination, submission, cooperation, followership?

Expensive-Guitar3609 · 2021-08-17T03:48:16+00:00

When men talk about "submission" we mean "submissiveness in the bedroom", not being a housemaid who can't go out, wear skirt and is afraid of us.

I don't care having to argue with my fiance and explaining the same stuff 10 times to her if she's going to let me do her doggystyle like a porn queen after.

Fuck it, I'll let her walk over me and put me a chain to my neck next time we visit her pearents if she lets me put it in her ass.

Other than that, I drive, I have the friends I fucking want, you don't talk shit about my work and where do I invest my money because I'm the main breadwinner and the smart one in the house, and if you are going to bring home a dog or we are having a boy, I pick their names.

I don't want my dog having a fag name or my kid named after one of her exes.

The rest she can do what she wants. I don't care.

YoshiTora23 · 2021-08-17T14:05:34+00:00

Ask older women who were married to a man worthy of submission what “submission means”.

Your grandmothers and great grandmothers who married men worthy of submitting to. You’ll get a better idea of what it means and what they got out of it than asking people in online Internet forums who already have a negative idea of submission and men as a whole.

SuperSupremeKai · 2021-08-18T09:19:48+00:00

Firstly, there are different types of relationships, some give-and-take, others one-sided, but its up to those in the relationship to figure out whether they like it or not.

Secondly, submission shouldn't be a thing either sex should do, at least in the west. The reason why submission was so popular was because men had the most power in the past (the power that stems from being able to leave, that is). They had the work, the money, and the house. Divorce could set you up for a good while, but back then, it wasn't exactly lifelong. Women played the submissive role because they though they were 'feminine', while in truth, it was just a method to try and keep the man from changing his mind, feeding him when he was hungry and sleeping with him every once in a while. This would be purely one-sided if carried out nowadays where both men and women have their own work, money and places.

Whisper · 2021-08-19T06:40:04+00:00

What's important about female submission is the form, not the effect. Because of some sexual dimorphism in the human species, femsub BDSM isn't actually a kink.

It's mainstream human sexuality.

So when women act submissive, and men act dominant, it increases attraction and strengthens the relationship.

gopherish · 2021-08-21T05:26:26+00:00

You basically have all the points there in your post, but something isn’t clicking or tying it all together for you, it seems.

A relationship is a team, right? It has goals, and resources, and members, etc. Just like teams in other contexts, like work or sports. Well, when was the last time you saw a team work well together outside of relationships where they were firing on all cylinders, and everything was getting done smoothly and efficiently, with little to no miscommunication, strife, or waste, where there wasn’t a leader? Or where there were two leaders? Or where there were no leaders?

An example more closely associated with relationships is dancing. When two partners dance together, one leads, and the other follows. This is necessary because their physical actions have to be coordinated (if the dance steps are at all interesting and fun), and coordinating steps verbally would be lame as fuck. It would be exhausting. Every step would be a committee decision. What if the partners disagree? The best solution to this problem is for a leader to make the decisions. The follower doesn’t decide anything. Funny how you never see women complain about being followers in dancing.

The fundamental mechanism humans have for cooperating to achieve a goal as a group is to have a leader, for all the kinds of endeavors, including long-term mating.

If you’re not a leader, then you’re a follower. Being a follower isn’t bad. If you have a boss at work, you’re a follower. Does that make you their bitch? Does that make you a pushover? No. I’m sure your boss wants you to think for yourself and make helpful, constructive suggestions. But at the end of the day, once they’ve collected your ideas and have all the information and make a decision, being a good follower, you should follow the leader. If you don’t trust your leader, e.g. because they don’t listen to you, or they have bad judgment, or they’re inexperienced, or whatever it is, then you leave and find a better leader somewhere else.

Followers obey leaders. Followers submit to leadership. Whether it’s work, sports, or relationships. It has nothing to do with power or being powerless or being less, because followers can leave any time for better leaders. Followers expect and appreciate good leadership.

As a side note, this was why “obey” was in some traditional marriage vows for women, before feminism ignorantly removed it: it made explicit each person’s role in the relationship, leader and follower. “Hundreds, if not thousands, of generations of marriages worked with this organization, but no worries, we can just throw that out without repercussions, probably,” said feminism. 🤦🏻‍♀️

So, who should be the leader? The man, or the woman? Well, for most women, just ask them if they want to lead the man in a dance, or if they want to be lead. There’s your answer for relationships too, probably. Would you (some woman in general, or perhaps the reader) really want to mate long-term with a man who isn’t a good leader? A man who is the opposite of a good leader? A man who is weak, a pushover, indecisive, incompetent, not knowledgeable, unwise, dependent, unreliable, afraid, skittish, intimidated, dominated, or not confident? Does that actually turn you on?

Men instinctually lead, and need a follower to do so. A woman who is a good follower seems much more feminine, and therefore attractive. Not only will the woman feel higher value because of this, but so will he. Being with a woman who is not a good follower, or is not a follower at all, deprives the man of opportunities to harness and exercise those leadership instincts, and reach his full potential. He will feel unfulfilled. This is why men look for submissiveness

In my opinion, women have been lied to about how relationships work. They’ve been told that what works is actually oppressive, what’s up is down, what’s left is right, and you don’t want to be a submissive pushover, do you? All that horseshit was being pushed by masculine women who wanted to finally act how they wanted to, but without losing the ability to attract the best men, and they don’t stand out as especially masculine if they bully and cajole and browbeat all other women into acting just like them. That’s why feminism is misogynistic: it tells women that following their instincts is bad, and that they’re lesser if they don’t act like men. It dislikes feminine women.

Comments