Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What if one partner NEEDS to give up control to the other? And the other NEEDS to be IN CONTROL. What you're saying is that they cannot be allowed to have what they each want.
A complEmentary relationship is not exclusively the province of an equal partnership. Some partnerships are differently powered. If it works for them and they each entered into the relationship knowing that it was not to be the traditional roles, one of them giving up control over him/herself and the other accepting the responsibilities of that control, who is anyone else to call that relationship abusive. And giving up control or exerting control does not negate mutual respect (as another poster posited). It IS non-conforming and it IS non-traditional; but it is neither abusive nor unacceptable to the parties in that relationship when it is consensual.
No one outside the relationship has the right to establish the parameters of anyone else's relationship assuming it is within the law and consensual.
That sounds all well and good, but I wouldn't exactly call it functional. This to me is the epitome of a submissive bride, and I don't think many people would look at this and call it healthy. The view from the back might be enjoyed by the audience, though.
I would like to see the women / Females here who desire to lead a Female led lifestyle. Are you the Alpha Female who is controlling enough to dominate her men to providing her with the security you desire and demand ? As the Female you are. Shouldn't you be in control?
I consider the above a poorly written statement of what could be an interesting discussion.
Unfortunately it has drawn out all the people who are adamant that everyone should have an "equal" relationship dispite that such a thing doesn't exist.
I think the nay sayers hear "Domineering" and "Abusive" rather than the term dominant which indicates a tendancy to lead and set the direction.
I've observed many women who were strong in a way that can be described as dominant. I have one aunt in particular that called the shots and rightly so. My wonderful uncle was a dithering nice guy.
Another aunt of mine was an extremely strong woman. She left her abusive husband, raise 3 kids very well and ran a beauty parlor all alone. When she married another man he was a meek and mild guy who didn't have much of an opinion or plan. She just did figured it all out because... he had a mind for music an philosophy, not brass tacks.
Oh... and by the way, my uncle was utterly heart broken when his "dominant" wife died and the other aunt is still very happily married to a man who dotes over her.
Neither of these men, in my opinion, were in need of growing anything.
So folks... when you say that all partnerships must "damn it" must be equal as far as I'm concerned, you are making a demand on all people who are married to not be a follower. "Leaders and followers should not get married!!!" "Marriage is only good when no one is in charge and decisions are made mutually." "There is only ONE way to be properly married!!!
Nonsence!!!
The animal world is havoc without the calming force of a dominant personality.
Family leadership, when it is done well, should be admired as much as those wonderful couples who are able to easily form a mutual concensus.
I absolutely reject domineering, always right, my way or the highway people. This is toxic in a marriage.
But when someone sets the course because the other person is uncomfortable in a leadership role... what's wrong with that? A good leader works with the followers and ensures they are included and cared for.
Does leadership = dominance? Well, an awful lot of leaders, that is the "doers" of the world, have a dominant streak.
I applaud strong women like I applaud strong men. I admire strong people.
And the facts of life are this, strong people step into a void when weak minded ditherers are unable to fill the gap.
And what the hell is wrong with them being women???!!!!
Because successful marriages are true partnerships. One partner dominating and controlling another has no place in a happy, healthy relationship.
Again, why? and why not? You are simply restating your pov without examples. IF the relationship is consensually power disparate, why should the parties not be allowed to be married? Do not leave out the word CONSENT. I believe you are seeing this issue as one person FORCING dominance and control over the other.
Not all partnerships are equal. Look at any legal partnership, some partners are "more equal" than others. Each gets out what each puts into the relationship. If the agreement is consensual, and it meets the needs of all parties, why, from your POV, are the people in it not permitted to be happy?
You are right, a marriage is a partnership. What works for one may not work for all. What works for most, may be the worst thing for 2 people. Each couple should be permitted to work out the dynamics and partnership requirements for themselves. To say that OSFA is as wrong for clothing as it is for a relationship.
Again, why? and why not? You are simply restating your pov without examples. IF the relationship is consensually power disparate, why should the parties not be allowed to be married? Do not leave out the word CONSENT. I believe you are seeing this issue as one person FORCING dominance and control over the other.
Annie, what is your opinion about marriages of domination having children? I know not all married couples have children but that doesn't mean the issue should be ignored. The family unit, which begins with marriage, is after all the cornerstone of society.
I am a very strong woman in my relationship, however, my husband is in no way, submissive. He appreciates my strength and knows, without a shadow of a doubt that I would fight to the death to protect both he and my children.....as would he. According to him, he wouldn't want a woman who was any other way, although he doesn't think there's anything wrong with other types of women. It just makes his life easier. He doesn't have to worry about us if he's not around. I am safe....always. He doesn't have the added burden of having to feel like he's got to protect me constantly...and I DO make a great many of the major decisions.....again, it takes the weight off of him to have a wife who is capable of doing so. If he feels very strongly about something, I do step back though and let him lead...I trust his judgements, as he trusts mine.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
