Do you think that a marriage works when a woman is the dominant partner? I am not talking about domination, but dominance meaning dominant traits.
My wife said I must answer 'yes' to this question.
Oh, good one!!! LMAO! And, she's right, you know!
in the words of famous stand up comedian, dave chappelle, a woman, in America, will ALWAYS have the upper hand in a relationship (discarding abusive ones of course). Why you may ask? It's simple, they have p*****, and men don't. Plus, it seems like women can go a lot longer without sex than men, and most men often think with their little heads rather than their big ones. Hence, I think it's natural women in society control the relationship. sorry if that sounds sexist, as I don't mean to be. Just stating an observation. like on television comedy shows, you'll notice they always portray the would be wife as very sexy, smart, independent and highly resourceful. Whereas the husband, he gets portrayed as the gullible stupid schmuck, who's just lucky enough to be with her. lol.
LOL, I thought the men had the p*******, which they use to think with.
I don't know what "p" word you think i used, but i meant the one that can also be called a v*****.
sorry, i can't say the full word here in forums, as i don't want to risk getting banned.
Good point, but in my opinion, the answer in the scenario..
How can there be dominance without domination?
It's all wink, wink, we don't really mean anything bad, just.. Uhh..dominance.
Plus a lot of hand waving and misdirection, of course.
What they don't understand is that people don't fit into neat little molds. Not everybody is a leader or a follower. Some of us think of both leaders and followers with equal disdain.
Dominant male is just a man with more male characters than female characters, or do those not exist anymore? Have we all blended into each other? Statically marriages that end up surviving the divorce train and might I add are happy married couples, have more of a role of male and female gender. The secret is that the woman is smart enough in the marriage to allow her husband to be appreciated as a man. Meaning that she still loves his male qualities and he loves her female qualities. Most women who are straight prefer to have sex with a man that has a p instead of a v.
I just popped on here to find that this discussion is now going on in two different threads on here. I haven't been on here too much recently because my ex-husband and I have been spending hours and hours of time together, putting peach organza ribbons and flowers on little party favors for our daughter's big party. (Yes, he's "ex", but - trust me - it has nothing to do with his willingness to compromise his masculine appearance when it comes to what he'll do for his kids.) Anyway...
I think it may more be that smart, strong, women aren't willing to "go with the traditional program" (written in ideas of another time) that contributes to those marriages staying together. Or, it's that some women and men actually go with those old gender roles, so they just accept that their married life will be dictated by gender. There still keeps being kind of scooting around, and switching around of the issues in this discussion.
The masculine traits "looks-wise" matter:
Who/what is attracted to whom is one thing. Of course, as a heterosexual woman, I'm attracted to a guy whose appearance is more masculine than feminine. That's about looks, though. As a human being (that few people seem to know exists behind this feminine-looking appearance I have), I know that what we are on the inside can be very different from what we are on the outside.
Where I would draw the line on "appearance on the outside" is with the person's actual physical traits. Nothing else. If a guy is just waiting for a bus, say, you can see what his traits are. Those are the traits I mean.
It seems to me you've included in "traits" behaviors, like whether or not a guy fixes the car. There's a stereotype. Whether a guy uses the strength he has to lift a washing machine is a matter of his being able to - not a part of who he is on the inside. If he has come to equate his masculinity with whether or not he can lift a washing machine, he's got issues. The world is full of masculine, emotionally strong, kind, brilliant men who can't easily lift a washing machine (or even fix a car).
The issue of men and women being different. I'm not someone who thinks they're the same (although I would like to point out that in decades of living as an adult, I've only spent 15 months carrying a total of babies and an additional 3 hours delivering them. Yes. We're different, but we're not all that different. If we're mature and well adjusted and smart and strong and capable of loving, we're all pretty much the same. People who have been raised to think otherwise "aren't there yet", and that's the issue that needs addressing - not recommending that people adjust to make those "not there yet" people stay in a marriage that isn't going to hold up (or remain miserable in one that they'll glue together with their unhappiness), by falling in line with the ignorant belief that women and men are not (or cannot possibly be) absolutely "the same" kind of human being on the inside.
There's an awful lot of talk about India, but Hubs are read in the US as well. I don't know what does or doesn't go on with Indian marriages, but maybe some people in India (if that's the issue with a Hub) would benefit by seeing the ideas of a different culture. If the idea is to write Hubs designed to go along with someone else's culture, maybe that's something to mention up front in a Hub.
I think whoever knows more about whatever area the decision involves makes the best person for input into decision-making on that area.. At the same time, decisions should be made together with people understanding that the other's views may be valid. Explaining reasoning (and if necessary backing up reasoning by sharing with the other person some expert references) are important too.
Nobody should be trying controlling anything that isn't his "business" or "department". Shared control might be over the house. If kids are throwing a baseball in the living room, whichever parent is nearby first has the right to tell the kids to stop because that shared control means both partners have agreed there will be no wrecking the living room by the kids. On the other hand, if a child has a school or medical issue, maybe one parent knows better about either education or medical things, and should be the one with a little more say. Then again, if both people are equal in this kind of knowledge, they have to decide through reasoning and communication.
The thing with control versus decision-making is that one person can appear to be the one who makes all the decisions; when, in reality, the other person is the one who finds way to have control of just about every last second the couple are together.
People with inappropriate control issues have problems and need help. If they don't get it their marriage will most likely end.
With any two people who live together, maybe it's rare that one person won't think he "knows better" about everything than the other. The person who thinks he "knows better" is often dead wrong, and sometimes the difference is whether the other person comes across as someone the "knows betters" respects or not.
I would say that one person essentially thinking he knows better and is better than the other may well be the root of most divorce. People who lean toward being selfish, arrogant, and/or aggressive (just in personality, not necessarily real aggression) tend to measure others by themselves. They value what they are (otherwise they wouldn't be what they are), and their self-esteem is higher than it should be (for a person who hasn't yet quite mastered the art of being an unselfish, non-aggressive, caring person WHILE STILL BEING strong and smart).
Divorces happen because too many husbands look at wives who look like I do and think, "She can't possibly know what she's talking about unless it's about washing dishes or changing diapers."
They happen because too many wives put the whole load of "all of life" on the backs of their husbands, acting as if the guy is nothing but a workhorse and handy thing to keep around.
They happen because people look at someone who is and looks masculine and assigns him "duties" and "roles" and "tasks" and "expectations"; and they happen because people do the same when they look at women - but often in reverse.
I can't even believe that in 2010 someone in this thread (I forget who) mentioned women "fighting for equality". Can you believe that women even HAVE to "fight for equality"??? (And that's in the US and whatever other Western countries there are.)
I just don't think "appreciating a guy as a man" includes making sure he's always the one to deal with auto repairs. It's also not great to presume that a woman with the flu might not appreciate having someone make her a cup of soup. Letting a guy know she appreciates his male qualities/appearance or role in intimacy is a very different thing from whether or not someone equates washing-machine lifting and tire-changing with "what men do and are".
Divorces happen because one person, or neither person, doesn't even know who/what the other person is as a human being - past whatever shows up on the outside.
Believing that placing emphasis on "male-ness" over emphasis on "human-ness" is what people have to do to hold a marriage together underestimates the potential of both men and women.
I don't know about India or anywhere else, but I know that since the US first existed, a whole lot of oppression because of sex or race has resulted in generations of lost human potential and power in one way or another. Let's not raise yet another flock of young girls and boys to believe that the only possible way for people to stay married is to buckle under to traditional roles (or associates with those roles).
How about we start telling people how to recognize what is genuine love (the kind that lasts) as opposed to what is less than that.
In the meantime, time to set up the dining room table for another night of ribbon-and-pearl-gluing on those organza flowers for my daughter's (and sons') father and me. You know what? Maybe I shouldn't share this personal information on here; but maybe if, back when we were married, I hadn't spent so many hours doing things like dance-recital costumes and getting school-party treats together alone (because "the kid stuff is the mother's job", according to "some people") - maybe THAT would have been something that headed off a lot of problems.
I tried to raise my two sons to have strength of character, intelligence, emotional maturity, good sense, kindness, respect for other people, and the knowledge that they have a right to equal respect from others, as human beings. I hope their future wives are smart enough to know to let them know they're appreciated for those things; because if they do their marriages will stand a good chance of surviving. The masculinity I see in those two young men is far more than whether or not either of them goes around lifting refrigerators and changing tires (especially in a Triple A world).
I tried to raise my daughter to have the same things, and I think if her future husband sees those things in her (and lets her know he does), their marriage will stand a good chance too. No. She can't lift a refrigerator (and she does have Triple A too), but she's smart and strong and kind and amazingly multi-talented. Anyone who loves her (whether that's me or her future husband) would not expect her to compromise all the things she is out of fear that her husband may feel less manly. I don't think he will, because I think he's like my daughter and sons when it comes to that kind of thing.
True, I don't know many people from India very well, but I find it hard to believe that somewhere in India some mother wouldn't find it "about as manly as it gets" if her daughter's father joined in the fun of making frilly party favors. I know, without a doubt, that there are plenty of daughters in India who are every bit as bright and strong and talented as my American daughter.
Maybe this is just "frilly maternal instinct" or else the hard-wiring of evolution, but I think one of the "manly" things a guy can do is be happy to have his own children, take care of them, be engaged in their lives, be willing to risk a little appearance of not being "masculine" here or there; and truly share in all the aspects of parenting (not just the ones a guy thinks guys are involved with).
People on here are talking about "encouraging abuse" and "not encouraging" abuse and brutes and goons, etc. Well... It is a form of abuse for girls and women to live in a world that doesn't even know they have the potential, intelligence, and strength so many girls and women have. It's abuse to expect girls and women not to be who they are and everything they can be "just to keep a marriage together" because some guy doesn't know the differences between things like masculinity, stereotypes, etc.
It's abuse to let those old notions stay around, rather than speak up and say, "No - there's a difference between 'being masculine' and changing tires."
They are the upcoming generation of "marrieds", and maybe those of us who have learned a little something about how and why divorce happens can share what we've learned the hard way. (Heck - my generation is the one that starting spreading the word that romantic love is nothing more than infatuation; and that it's either destined to die or else turn into "something more comfortable", and we should all marry our best friends. Oops. Turns out best friends sometimes ought to stay best friends. )
(Sorry for taking up so much space here. The subject of marriage and divorce is one of my "things", but now even more so, as I'm adjusting to the thought of my youngest child getting married. Either way, I do think this is an important discussion for people to have.)
What does that mean leaders and followers...everyone follows, directions, roads, etc. If you aren't a follower or leader your just a hanger on aka. groupie. When men and women form a relationship sometimes they must be a leader and a follower, for instance while dancing. Dominance in a relationship doesn't work give and take, follow and lead...good and bad.
Remember that there is duality in life.
We aren't talking about following directions to a destination
People don't have to be either leaders or followers. You can just BE. You can exist without heroes, without leaders.
Again, yes, sometimes people take dominant roles in a relationship. What I object to is Dawn's insistence that male dominance is a necessary part of a good relationship.
It isn't. While I prefer equality, females can be dominant also and that doesn't make for a bad marriage as she insists.
We will now enjoy a reading of "Famous Moderates Who Made History"
Pcunix has a fascinating library of books that were never printed:
"Of Lemmings and Liberal Leadership"
"World Powers which Thrived without Leaders"
"Committees that Got Stuff Done"
"Communes that Worked"
"Ships without Captains"
Dominance is about as evil as being left-handed or redheaded. Like a gun or a car, it is only as "bad" as the person wielding it. It is not bad or good, or really even neutral; It is a a psychological attribute or type, like a sense of humor, artistic talent, or shyness. It is as natural as breathing, and as right as rain.
Learning the proper use, exercise and application of Dominance in young men, requires modeling of mature adult males who have mastered self control. Absent those role models (like in the PC world), mischief and bad behavior abound.
Natural Masculine Dominance just IS, and you can argue the point until you're blue in the face. Like the Earth not being flat; Just because you say otherwise, does not make it so.
After the views answering your last got me I feel compelled to answer this.
I'm not quite sure I understand the difference between domination and dominant traits.
Do you mean perhaps women who perform well in what are considered masculine roles like earning money, putting up shelves and maintaining machinery for example?
If so the answer is yes if. . . the if being if the couple are content with the situation. If either resent the situation then no it won't work. If for example there is better paid work available for women and they agree that the woman should adopt the role of bread winner and the man that of house husband, no problem. If the man feels usurped and failing his family then no, doomed.
If you mean perhaps that the woman is just stronger willed than the man, again if agreed from the word go, fine. Sparks can fly and relationships end if the doormat wife suddenly ceases to be a doormat.
Male dominant traits are those things that make a man masculine and sexy to a female. Not a brute that is a jerk, that is totaly unattractive!
But surely a strong and confident male does not feel the need to dominate?
Yes, hooray, somebody has finally hit the nail on the head on this subject of dominance. There is nothing satisfying about trying to control or exert ones power over another. Strength and confidence, perfectly put John. Thank you for bringing some sense to these forums.
The most depressing thing about this whole topic is how out of a group of people who write for profit or pleasure so many do not understand the meaning of the words they use.
Wait for the voice that says strength, confidence and dominance all have the same meaning!
A man can ve dominat and still be a gentleman, just like a woman can be dominant and still be a Lady
Very rarely can a dominant man be a gentleman, dominance is the antithesis of gentlemanly behaviour. Likewise, rarely does does a dominant woman behave in a ladylike manner.
I talk based on personal experience. I have met dominant men who were more gentleman than any other men. Being dominant is not a bad thing, what is bad is abusing that dominance and lacking respect for the other person.
I think, like Dawn, you totally misunderstand the meaning of dominance and misuse it.
I suggest you have met confident and self assured men who wear the mantle of gentleman comfortably and do not need to dominate others.
The very essence of domination is a total lack of feelings or respect for other individuals.
Not at all. Dominance is not only about whipps and chains. Dominance goes further than that and it can be the basis of very strong relationships. A good Dominant (male or female) respects and cares for the other person.
Yes, but only with psychologically damaged submissives. I'm not saying that the dominant caused the problems, of course, just that this is not ideal mental health.
I don't agree with the "psychologically damaged submissives" term. That might be true in some cases but in others is not even near their reality.
Most submissive men I've met are successful professionals with very important positions. Being submissive for them is a type of "mind realease" where they can finally let go all their professional pressures and just be themselves -not only in the bedroom, but in general.
In the manner that I talk of dominance my mind could not be further from the bedroom. I suggest you learn to differentiate sexual role play and real life, try not to confuse the bedroom with every day life.
In normal everyday life a good dominant person doesn't exist and certainly doesn't care or respect other people.
I really suggest that you do try and learn the difference between being confident and being domineering.
... and maybe you should try to be more open minded to other people's lifestyles.
Hey, it's not me saying that if a man isn't dominant, he's submissive! There are plenty here who could and should be more open minded about the lifestyles of others.
As I said before, try learning the difference between confident and dominant. I suspect that if you scratch the surface you will find that most dominant men are lacking in confidence and make up for it by inflicting their will on others.
So John. Do you contend that ALL leaders of Industry & Politics are brutish thugs, lacking in Dominance?
What world do you live on, dude?
What world do I live in?
I live in a world where somebody asks a question and expects a relevant answer, not where the answer is skewed to suit the answerers agenda.
Try reading the OP eh?
Not worth the effort, John. You read his hub, right? And you still think there is reason to respond?
There is a strange fascination involved, a bit like those folk who have to look at car crashes.
Perhaps I've led a sheltered life but rarely have I met somebody so disconnected from reality.
But I should really use the time for something more worthwhile, write a hub or two, earn a few more ££.
Yes, I do understand the car crash analogy. I have decided to not look at it. Even though its horn is beeping constantly.
On balance I think you made the right decision. The frightening bit is how many share such strange views!
Will you two just kiss, and end the charade?
Your small little group of metro-boys feel that Dominance MUST be a Bad Word, and scream it at the top of your lungs. "Frightened" that your myopic little viewpoint isn't shared by one and all.
Most of us chose not to live in fear. I get it. Sheep HATE Sheep dogs, and quake at the very sound of their voices. You and your ilk are welcome to bleat with the flock, just know that it won't have any impact on reality, or word definition.
Dominance is Honorable, Worthy, Polite, Confident and Strong. The very essence of Gentlemanly Behavior. Just because you fail to understand that, does not make it otherwise.
"There is nothing so strong as gentleness, and nothing quite so gentle as True Strength." ~American Tiger~
Dream on, safe in the knowledge that you are better than everybody else and you alone follow the true path, rewrite the dictionary, make a few things up, keep the blinkers tight, mind your ship doesn't run aground.
Do not be afraid of different, it is only dangerous amongst narrow minded people.
Interestingly enough, it is the metro-boy side of this discussion which harps on about fear and abuse. The words "fear" and "afraid" pepper their posts.
Sheep in sheep's clothing, who even attack and pick on the girls who do not share their fears.
I'll bet wads of cash that neither one has any bass in his voice, or adventure in his soul. Effete little snobs who would not know what to do with a Real Woman if she sat in their lap.
Takes all kinds, I guess.
Then stop using this word!
Dominant does not mean strong. It does not mean sexy. It does not mean confident and most especially, it does not mean male.
You waffle all over the place. One minute it's "I don't mean being in charge" but the next you applaud someone who most definitely says males need to be in charge.
Your hub closes with a swipe at women who make more money than their husbands and strongly suggests that's a cause for marital problems. For some people it could be, but for many others it is not an issue at all and you just refuse to understand that.
I think you are confused and are giving very bad advice while you muddle through your own feelings about all this.
Nobody has to be dominant. Males don't have to be the bread winners and males don't have to have ultimate decision power. NOBODY HAS TO.
You know what Pcunix, I have to say that I wrote an article with a strong word in its title dominance not dominant, in my first paragraph I talk about a man and a woman respecting one another. I have never said a man controlling a woman, and that is not or never has been the intention of any of my articles. In fact I wrote a very powerful article on how husbands rape their wives, and how wrong it is.
Nor have I applauded a person saying that a man is in charge. I think that you are very naive, on the topic of marriage, hubpages is global, and the second largest readers of my hubs are people that live in India.
When I talk about this subject it is very important, and 3 women in America alone are sexually assaulted every minute. If you think for one moment I condone violence on women you are insane..........
These articles are for women, but you are not seeing the bigger picture and this has nothing to do with money, there are going to be times in a marriage when a woman may have to make more money then her husband to support the family times are tough. In those times especially a women needs to understand that her husband and most husbands (your average) still need to feel like a man in the marriage.
The typical male will cheat on his wife....why because he has lost the male dominance in his home, he is now going out to breed spread his seed, feel like a man.
I did not comment on your hub, you commented on mine, you wrote a hub on my hub and posted a forum topic about it, you twisted the very essence of my words and meaning by using a simple word that I used to attract readers to help them understand how not be abusive.
Have you ever taken in to consideration that a man who may be on the verge of being abusive, from another country read my hub to justify his behavior and then was helped when he learned what it meant to be a real man meaning to respect your wife as well take care of her and her and the family. India is the second largest reader of my hubs.
No you did not stop and look at the bigger Picture Pcunix, you stopped at the word in my title and you I must say are quite naïve and sheltered.
No, Dawn, you are wrong.
Yes, I object to your attempt to confuse the meanings of words, because (as I have repeatedly said), I think that using that word and insisting that it is the right path gives excuses to those who will do abusive things. I AM NOT SAYING THAT YOU CHAMPION ABUSE. I am saying that by using words like dominance, you give power to those who DO want to abuse.
But that's not the only issue I have. You say things like (direct quotes)
Many women fight for their independence and to be equal with their husbands in every respect and many go beyond that becoming the female dominance in the marriage and equal footing may work but female domanice does not.
I am talking about things like strength from a husband, helping his wife with her car, trash, things around the home, protecting her, providing for her. Feminine values are more nurturing, approaching her husband when he gets home form work and greeting him with a kiss, cooking for him or at least bringing in some good take out or prepared food, comforting the children or making him soup when he is sick.
Those are sexist.
Many people try and fight these gender rolls and pretend that they are not a part of them but the fact still remain that they are.
(it's "roles", by the way, not "rolls" - I hate it when my fingers mistype what I'm thinking)
More sexism. And then this:
A prime example of this is women in the film industry, music industry that make more money than their husbands, now how many of those marriage are still around?
Plenty of women make more than their husbands and nobody is miserable because of it. One of my daughters has always earned more than her husband - and he does far better than most men or women. They don't have problems.
You err in thinking that everyone is like you. We aren't. You have a narrow view of what the world should be and, very simply, you are wrong.
You know what the base line problem is Pcunix, is that you firmly believe that men and women are the same and they there are no gender roles, well you are wrong...when a man can have a baby, go through perimenopause, go through menopause, get menstruation to begin with, have female hormones, hot flashes and are biologically in strength stronger than a man then I will say yes we are the same.
“A prime example of this is women in the film industry, music industry that make more money than their husbands, now how many of those marriage are still around?”
Yes, I said that and it is the truth, this is true, not sexist.
“I am talking about things like strength from a husband, helping his wife with her car, trash, things around the home, protecting her, providing for her. Feminine values are more nurturing, approaching her husband when he gets home from work and greeting him with a kiss, cooking for him or at least bringing in some good take out or prepared food, comforting the children or making him soup when he is sick.” Yes, these are great traits in a man and women, not all marriage are like this, but a majority is.
You are not talking about the majority though you live in a bubble…….On a global realization male and female gender roles are very much the norm and when applied in a loving respectable marriage theory will prosper. You fight anything traditional….as you stated you are an extreme liberal, and when you are moved so far in one direction it is hard to even turn your head….I am coming from a place of the normal, not the extreme!, Men and women are not the same and I love the fact that they are not! If we were all the same then how can we produce life?
Again, I do not dispute the reality that large numbers of people agree with you.
You fail to understand that "normal" doesn't mean "right". Among many populations, it is "normal" to hate homosexuals. It was quite "normal" to own slaves in the early history of our country.
Plainly you can't understand that your nonsense about income disparities is sexist, so thrte is no point in my trying to explain that to you.
But you continue to ignore your muddled use of "dominance" and your sexist insistence on gender roles. Hint: biology is not a gender role. Submissiveness is. This is:
am talking about things like strength from a husband, helping his wife with her car, trash, things around the home, protecting her, providing for her. Feminine values are more nurturing, approaching her husband when he gets home form work and greeting him with a kiss, cooking for him or at least bringing in some good take out or prepared food, comforting the children or making him soup when he is sick.
Those are stereotyped, sexist, gender roles.
I've already mentioned that one of our daughters earns far more than her husband. Your comment there about cooking made me think of our other daughter because her husband does most of the cooking - even though she only works part time. He cooks because he is really, really good at it and they both enjoy his results. So do we when they have us for dinner.
By the way, that younger daughter is the one who reacted with "WTF!" when I sent her a link to your hub.
You are wrong, Dawn. Your advice is well meaning, but dangerous and wrong.
That greats your daughter makes more money than your son-in-law, yes you have said that twice and I assume they have no kids, yet...fine! So when or if they do have kids, is he going to stay home and raise them? Great if he is, not great if after a month they stick the baby in day care because she wants to pursue her job and he his. Did your wife stay home and take care of the kids? I am taking a guess that she did in the beginning just a guess, it also show that your home is female dominated with two girls and your wife you are outnumbered and were you raised... You mentioned the word homosexual three times in your statements back and forth, why?
What is the point of brining your wife and daughters into the conversation? I understand that you think I am wrong for using the word dominance and that you believe that I am sexist because I think that some of the traditional values of family are healthy. YES I think that a husband and wife when they have family meaning kids should raise them and one parent husband or wife should be providing care for that child. Yes I think that if a man wants to cook diner great, yes I think that when a man marries a woman and he works and she stays home and raises the family that she should greet him with a kiss and a hug when he walks through the door. Yes I believe in family dinners. Family game night. A husband and wife being respectful infront of the children to each other. No I don’t believe in a woman forsaking her kids and pursuing a career. In that case then just get married and don’t have kids. So what is the problem with the pursuit of traditional family values? Or are the words “tradition” or “conservative” values now going to be another bone of contention for you?
Again, Dawn, you are confused.
I understand that you are only trying to help. I understand that you really, really think your way is the best way for marriages to survive. I understand that you don't mean what MOST people mean when you say the word dominance.
What you do NOT see is how sexist your writings are and how your arguments can be used to justify behavior you would never condone.
I don't know what arrangements my daughter would make if they ever had children - I don't think either of them ever will as they are getting to the fish or cut bait point on that, but whatever they did would be fine for them and the children. You seem to agree with that, but there are plenty of people who do not.
We are never going to agree and it is plain that there are plenty of others who see this exactly as I do. There are also others who, whether they agree or disagree, plainly interpret dominance as "being in charge", "final decision maker" and so on. That alone should show you why "dominance" is a bad word to use.
As to the rest, you are sexist. You can't see it, I understand that. I don't believe in sex based societal roles, you don't entirely believe in that either, but some of it still sticks.. and you can't see it. That's OK -most people have far more of that prejudice than you do. I give you credit for that.
Muddled confusion again. Here you say that's fine, but in your hub you say
Many people try and fight these gender rolls and pretend that they are not a part of them but the fact still remain that they are.
A prime example of this is women in the film industry, music industry that make more money than their husbands, now how many of those marriage are still around?
So which is it, Dawn? Fine if you don't have kids? But if you have kids, the wife must care for them? Well, no, apparently not, because then here you also said
one parent husband or wife should be providing care for that child.
So it doesn't matter which parent? Then where does the problem with the film star income come from? You say that's a problem, but here you say it's fine - as long as there are no kids, but then you reverse that and say either parent can care for the kids!
You obviously have a great deal of internal confusion here, don't you?
people don't fit neatly into these stereotypes of "nurturing" woman and "provider" man. Personality and temperment comes into it too. For example, I am a "thinker" which is more stereotypically a male trait. My husband is more a "feeler". He is not a wimp, but he is more in tune with how people feel than I am.
I haven't twisted anything. If you don't like my comments at your hub, you are free to delete them - and you don't need to worry about that in the future, because i will NEVER dare comment at your hubs again.
Again: I understand that you think you are being helpful. I understand that you do not condone abuse. I have repeatedly said that.
The problem is that others will use what you DO condone as justification for abuse - mental or physical. I think we have seen hints of that in some of the comments from certain conservative leaning men.
"Dominance" is a loaded word. The rest of your hub is sexist and insists that gender roles must be stereotypes for a successful marriage. That's nonsense, but what bothers me the most is the justification it gives to those who will use your words as excuses to bully their wives.
I know you mean well. You are simply wrong.
I think it can work if the male is a passive person. I don't think it can work if both the man and woman are dominant people.
The fetish and non-fetish versions are the same thing (who has the most power), it's just the non-fetish version doesn't require a specialized wardrobe or toys. You are deluding yourself if you think they are different.
what do you consider "dominant" traits? being bossy? controlling the finances? firing orders? making all the important decisions?
Depends--find a guy that wants a woman to be the dominate one in the relationship and your in buisness.
I'll answer this when I've cooked dinner, washed the dishes, put the kids to bed and sit down to rub my Mrs feet...What was the question again?
Dawn. Hey! Married to one person, 35 yrs. When one sex dominates another in marriage, it is the same as one person being in dominance over another. Marriage is a partnership. 50/50 That is also by law. Marriage is by consensus: Two consenting adults. If one surrenders their "Sovereignity" to another, then one is sub-servient to that other. That is not in the vow you took when you married. You didn't "Hit your prospective hubby over the head and drag him back to the cave" If you did, then good luck with that. Your mate didn't do that to you either. Your marriage didn't even need a peice of paer to make it real. It was already real between the both of you. It was real in your heart, and in your mind. That is the balance. Mates don't dominate.
any kind of combination of dominant/submissive types can work - it is so subjective. It is truly amazing what unbelievable relationships do actually thrive. Sometimes I'm amazed that anyone can survive in a marriage, or even in a significant other relationship. But I actually know so very few people who truly do well in "traditional" relationships with the standard gender roles in place, that now I think the traditional way was all a myth, from the beginning. Many people I've met SAY they are traditional but the better you know them, the more you find out how different and strange they really are! The secret to making love work is always listening, responding always from the love in your heart, and respecting your partner. If you do that and have mushy, steamy hot love as well, you will live together until you are 140 or more! no lie!
of course, none of this is going to happen for me because I can't make up my mind about what KIND of partner I want - let alone whether they should be dominant or submissive. sigh.
Oh darn, your not talking about femdoms? I know a hot mistress that,,,, well you said your not talking about that so ok,,,,
IMO most women in marriages are the dominate ones, even if the guy does not think so.
As long as there is peace and some degree of ease and prosperity, the opportunity for female dominance abounds. Men don't like to argue, and men don't like to "go without." (Obviously stereotypes fail miserably under any kind of scrutiny, but this question relies on them, so there you have it.)
Every rock solid long lasting marriage that I am aware of has one dominant partner, about even numbers of dominant male and female. None of those are the happiest marriages, they are the least inspiring and reek of hypocrisy - and are predominantly christians.
A woman can be dominant, as long as she lets the man play in his shed, is greatful when he gets through the list of chores and doesn't overdo the multi tasking. Oh, and of course there is the V and P thing! If the dominant woman can allow herself to be liberally satisfied, I think everyone is happy.
Jewels, I think that you got my take on this whole thing...lol Yes thats the point a women alowing a man to play in his shed and be a man, and of course the V and P thing.......I like my P to be a little more dominant than my V, but of course only when I say so.........
If the man is taken out of the man the fun is gone. Give him the shed.
Agreed. Many wives today desire to be the head of the household. In all cases, the husband is required to be the head of the household. A woman should have authority over some things also. This is why a wife is considered to be the helpmate. Some may not agree, but in a marriage, it is the man responsibility to be the leader of his family.
...now we're talkin'....sure let him play in the shed....i've got the garage with the toys!.......couldn't help myself....Dawn, I get what you are saying!
Only if she wears the appropriate attire! Such as a black leather bra, black leather crotchless short shorts, and black nylon fishnet stockings with black garters! And oh yeah, I almost forgot....the black leather whip!
Yeah, I think there becomes a major problem when the woman stops the man from playing in his shed. She is dominating for the wrong reasons. That's controlling. Men hate to be controlled, so do women for that matter.
Any guys out there like to shed some light on the shed thing by all means go ahead. Education is a predominant feature of hubpages isn't it?
The need to Create & Enrich. To improve on something with your own hands. Working and bending and yes, even forcing it, until it is softer, harder, faster, sharper, or even just more elegant. Because you've applied your will and experience to its form. That is a satisfaction difficult to match.
That works for the Shed AND the Bed, now that I think about it.
actually it really depends on who's the leader or the alpha male or alpha female.
In some cases, a man is naturally the head of the family....in some the woman is more driven, or smarter in financial ways, or more able to lead.
She may be more aggressive and he more passive or the other way. Some personalities need a person who's mellow to help them relax, others who are mellow like someone the opposite.
Either way it's fine.
As for dominance...That shouldn't happen with either sex. No one wants to be pushed around all the time, or told what to do. f**** that!
Exactly right. Though Dawn will (rightfully) insist that pushing around is not what she means.
What she does NOT understand is why people will interpret her stance that way as you just did. That's the danger.
and they don't necessarily fit the stereotypes ie can have a more aggressive woman paired with a more passive male
No we are pack animals .Females are queen . males king. A good queen doesn't vie to be king. A good king knows that without his queen all is lost.
Well there are men that love to be submissive, wanting their woman to order them around and treat them like dirt, really.
It's a fetish, sissy crossdressers. Lots more of them out there than you think. They even want to be submissive in the bedroom, in fact more so.
No, I'm not one, but don't ask how I know,,,
Since Dawn won't answer, maybe shed like to read this: http://hubpages.com/hub/Do-women-need-m … -dominance
American Tiger definitely needs to read it
I also posted this on your forum, this is your answer!
You just don’t get it Punix, have you ever heard of reverse Psychology? Do you know how many men are abusive to women? They would hit my title get into the site read it maybe one or even two may have a better understanding of how to treat a woman. As I said this is global, you just are so blind......now you are mocking it which sends me to the roof, this is not a joke. Three women get abused in the united states every minute, what do you think happens in other countries? I have a very large reader population from other countries where male dominance is the norm, they will click on my title and hopefully learn from it, but thanks to you making a mockery out of the whole thing you have just exasperated the whole point of abuse. As I said you are so naive. I have spend years working with abused women, if you think for one minute that we don’t live in a male dominated society you are blind, What we need to do is educate people not drive them away. I could care less what you think, but the fact that you are posting this and making a mockery out of it is so immature. You think that because one word in a title is going to make a man an abuser. I know for sure that the men who are on the abusive side have viewed my hub and maybe just one of them will have understood a little better about what is attractive about a male being dominant and it is not controlling or being abusive but about being support and loving to your wife.
So I hope that you are satisfied with yourself! Good job Punix
Main Entry: dominant
Part of Speech: adjective
Definition: superior, controlling
Synonyms: ascendant, assertive, authoritative, bossy, chief, commanding, demonstrative, despotic, domineering, effective, first, foremost, governing, imperative, imperious, leading, main, obtaining, outweighing, overbalancing, overbearing, overweighing, paramount, powerful, predominant, predominate, preeminent, preponderant, presiding, prevailing, prevalent, principal, regnant, reigning, ruling, sovereign, supreme, surpassing, transcendent
You really think that your hub would help abusers learn something.
They'd love it because it justifies their control. From the beginning to the end, you tell them that they are the important one, the one who makes the big decisions,the one who must be waited on. In your closing, you take a swipe at women earning money and give the thugs even more excuses for control.
I do rather suspect that if you were married to Dawn and tried to dominate her you would quickly find yourself in the local accident department.
I suspect not. I suspect she likes to play the role and (obviously) thinks she should.
That doesn't mean she still wouldn't tear ME apart. But probably not her spouse.
And again - if both people WANT these roles, that's fine. It's the insistence that DNA dictates we MUST do this that I object to.
1. YES I do believe that if a man in this economy can support his wife and kids so she can stay home and care for them, then he is a hero! For all of you dads out there that are supporting your wife and kids, hats off to you!!! If that is submission to Punix then so be it.
You are living in a land where rainbows have a pot of gold at the end of them. Have you spoken to a woman that has children and is married lately? You don’t think that they would love for their husbands to support them so that they can stay home and take care of their kids? When my husband’s works his butt off for the family, and takes care of our finances I respect him for that, yes I can bring home the bacon and now I do since my kids are in elementary school, but when they get home I am mom to them!!!! I make dinner every night! My husband puts up with me when I get moody and I put up with him. I as I said many times before I am respectful of him for being a man and when he washes the dishes every night which he does, I thank him!!!!!! I don’t inspect the dishes, if I did that would be discouraging to him, and dumb on my part. Am I subservient to my husband, hell no.....but I do respect him! Do I try to dominate him, of course I do all the time, but I know when to back down and be respectful. Let’s be real a woman as I have stated in many of my hubs is the ebb and flow of the sexual part of a marriage, so a man always walks a fine line. I just try and help couples so that they don’t use that as a way to control a marriage because in the end it back fires.
Maybe you want your wife to read my hub on how to be a naughty wife to her husband, then all of this pent up sexual frustration that you are having may help to soothe the beast in you.
John that was very funny ...lol you got me on that one....
It’s my opinion that Dawn’s philosophy is dead on. When a man can learn and understand what she is talking about, he will take his marriage to a level of passion and happiness that very few experience. How do I know that? I have lived both sides of this, brought my marriage to this level, and helped many other men to do the same.
So what worked for you automatically must be what everyone needs????
But Dawn asserts that male dominance is necessary for a healthy marriage. She says it is in our DNA (Wikipedia says most professionals do NOT agree with that, by the way).
No one who disagrees with her thinks that NO marriages enjoy playing these roles. We only objected to her insistence that it MUST be so.
Interestingly, in another thread, she just now seems to had backed off slightly, saying that some men might not be wired that way. Perhaps all the people telling her that she is wrong caused this.
Pcunix can you please tell me anywhere in my hub where I said every person? Please tell me the roles, that I have stated? male, female, I am talking about a man and a woman! professional do not agree with what? That a woman likes her husband to have male traits? No Pcunix infact most people who took the time to read my hub or have read many of my hubs, understood what I was talking about. Only a handfull of people actully that read the hub said that they didnt like the word dominance? that was it..........John did say though that you did not compare me to a male wart hog, I think thats what he said. Good thing.......lol
More than a handful, Dawn. And (according to Wikipedia) most professionals disagree with you also.
As to every person, you left no impression that any other arrangement was workable.
Amazingly, after having it hammered into you from every direction, you finally seem to be softening your position. Gee, I wonder why? Could it be you are realizing you were wrong and now want to pretend you never meant any of it?
Pc - she is softening her position? It doesn't look that way to me, what it looks like to me is that she is not defending her position because she knows it is just not defendable! She keeps saying she is not saying what she said - arggggh! I'm outta here!
Well, as I said before, I do not believe Dawn ever intended to promote actual male dominance. My position has been that a reader can interpret her hub that way, but I have never felt that was her intent.
Like you, I have been frustrated by her inability to see that it can easily be read that way, but I do not doubt her sincerity. She just doesn't see it.
Could you guys please help me out here? I am trying my best to dominate, but if you would just first put on these chain thingies . . .
I actually knew someone a few years back who invited me to join her for something like that.. I declined as politely as possible
Actually, she was a client.. a little bit of a sticky wicket, you know?
I don't know. Doesn't happen to me. You should write a hub about it. Or maybe you have.
You don't know what you might have missed! I have a friend who has all kinds of costumes and stuff and loves to posture with her boyfriend, but they don't act out the really wicked stuff. If I had ever really met a truly submissive man, I could have been sooooo happy! hahaha - just joking. I actually don't like the idea of anyone being truly submissive or truly dominant and I have met a few couples who have their own rules and it is obvious. I like equality best and I think it is healthy. But not one to make judgements on people for their gender role playing.
It could have been fun, my friends are never dissapointed
I politely submit that... YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG.
But hey. That's just One Man's opinion. ;-)
Best you do that with with ANYONE but me, 'nath. Unless you're asking my opinion on your freshly pained toenails. Which are quite fetching, I'm sure.
If you had any OTHER connotations to impart, might I also suggest you make them from well outside of my reach?
Gosh, I bet that has everybody quacking in their shoes.What will you do, write another derogatory hub demonstrating how, like any bully, you can dish it out but you can't take it back!
Johnny Reb? I didn't start that dishing. My first comment to puny-X was a compliment on his years of marriage, and a completely non-confrontational statement of my opinion on the matter. He responded with insults. pueblopollino Hub-hit me from out of nowhere. And I'M the bad guy?
Anath is a damned fine woman, in every possible connotation of the word. She needs your protection from me like a fish needs a bicycle. Run along now, and let the adults enjoy a little conversation.
I think in a good relationship the roles slip and slide to the needs of the moment more often than stay fixed. Least that's the way it was with me and my huny.
I have seen relationships where the wife is clearly in charge. He needs permission to do this and he is always afraid what the wife would think.
I know a dominate wife would not make the husband happy and they then to produce docile boys.
If only couples took the time to really get to know each other before saying I DO, marriages would last longer.
It is a fact that in a marriage the illusion of a shared decision making is a mirage! How can you share the decision on what type of car to buy? One must always compromise or go along.
Well awesome 77, you made some very awesome points, like knowing the person before the I DO, is a big one. It may be fun for some men to have role play with a dominant wife, but I dont know to many wives who find a guy that they can dominate that exciting in the bed room.....lol
Indeed. Those boots seem far more conducive to being bound to the backs of your thighs. Protection is absolutely indicated, but it's patently obvious the sycophant on the floor is totally inadequate to the task.
Is that John??
A common misconception. The cat had His way with curiosity for hours, and was merely Dead Tired when He finally let curiosity out of her cage. News of the cat's death was greatly exaggerated.
Hi Paper Tiger
Still can´t find that "anti liberal" hub you posted on me. Have you taken it off? Lost your bottle?
Now that I think about it, you're about the right size for an excellent "walking on the back" massage. Barefoot, of course.
Attempt it with those boots, I'll introduce you to an ancient form of back massage, currently reserved for race-horses.
Are you chatting me up or just asking for some soft trampling?
A bit of both, sweets. My back needs a little "gentle ministration" and I am so very picky about who I might let do these things.
And pay no mind to pubes ol'man. His myopic little world is fenced all about with fears, shame and guilt. The very concept of venturing outside of those boundaries ~flirting with a beautiful woman, for instance~ fills him with a dread which freezes his blood.
The anonymity afforded by the Internet has allowed him to BE and SAY all those things he's always longed to ~but could never get up the nerve for~. Pubes needs our sympathy, not our indulgence.
Hi Paper Tiger
More on line flirting? Can't you get yourself a proper girlfriend or have you given up on getting any real sex?
by Tony Lawrence6 years ago
This hub by DawnM disturbs me:http://hubpages.com/hub/how-a-man-can-g … s-marriageI like Dawn. I follow her, I read her hubs. I don't always agree with everything she says, but this is the first time I have...
by pisean2823116 years ago
does bible state that? ...if yes then it must be stating something for husbands too...what if husband himself doesnot know what he it talking about?...if wife expected to obey husband even if husband is irresponsible?
by mdawson177 years ago
In the recent years I have seen more men come out of the closet after being married for more than 5 years. This concerns me becuase I think of the spouse that has dedicated her complete life to him!I have seen children...
by schoolgirlforreal2 years ago
When you care about being with someone but they are overly dominant.....I'm losing interest in someone like thatWhy would a smart, independent, healthy woman want a man who tells her what to do, how to spend her money,...
by American Tiger6 years ago
I recently asked a group of single men, 23 to 35 years old, how they felt a woman would answer that question. Mixed reviews. I would love to get the many Hub-Lady's outlooks. This is as diverse and varied a group as...
by Emunah La Paz2 years ago
The Definition of Unattractive is: as follows: plain, ugly, unappealing, unpleasant, hideous, unlovely, unprepossessing, unsightly, ghastly, revolting, repellent, repulsive, repugnant.However, can this description...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.