Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Why FLRs Are Successful

I don’t really think that FLRs are more successful than vanilla relationships. What I observe is that the beginning of any relationship is intense, charged with sexuality, and that at least one of the partners is really working at it to make it succeed. Not necessarily in a positive way, but more in a way to satisfy his or her basic needs. I admit that this is indeed a jaundiced view, but then, we are all adults and know that there are avaricious people out there.

In a budding FLR most of the time it is the man who starts it. If it succeeds at first, it is because he puts in the time and the effort, and provides the incentives to the partner to begin and to continue the affair. Of course, the female has to participate to whatever extent is necessary. This is a time of trial, turmoil, and interesting experiences. It can fail for many reasons, most of which are caused by selfishness of either partner. But when it succeeds, it can be very satisfying for both partners. Regardless of claims to the contrary, an FLR is a D/S relationship.

A D/S relationship, regardless of who is in charge, is different from vanilla in the sense that one partner is committed to serve the other. The submissive still has expectations, but the very act of doing something for the partner is self serving and feeds back to the needs of the submissive. It is somewhat like masturbation, only doing it remotely. I challenge anyone to provide real experience where this is not true.

Without D/S the relationship reverts to vanilla where the dominance scale approaches, but seldom reaches 50-50. Read that as “nobody is in charge”. It can still work, but it is seldom an achievable match where both partners are satisfied with the idea. The traditional patriarchal relationship is usually from 60-40 to 90-10 with the man in charge. When it works, it is because the woman does not mind giving up freedom in exchange for protection and security. The man seldom has the opportunity to say, “Yes, I will be in charge, and she will be under my protection.” It has been simply understood that that will be the case.

That is why it is so unusual when the female becomes the leader through her own implementation of her needs. Here too, both have to support the idea, because it is against tradition, and it is unusual for the supposed stronger partner (the male) to give up leadership. By the way, if the usually stronger partner is the male, he is not necessarily more fitted to be the leader. If the woman is more intelligent or smarter than the man, it may be very hard on her to live with the submissive position unless she is or wants to be submissive naturally. I have known men who are not fit to lead a pack of roaches, yet they are supposed to be in charge of the family. Some of these men may not be smart enough to realize that it is the “little woman” who is the true leader, and that he is just a figurehead. With too much ego and testosterone these men cannot relinquish their position without feeling like a failure or a “sissy”. Yet these are the men who should definitely be in an FLR.

The ego issue is perhaps the most compelling for unenlightened people to oppose FLR. Listen to the bravado of macho males and you get the idea that they would rather die than give up their position, and that any hint that the woman is in charge is an insult to them. The adjectives, “henpecked” and “pussywhipped” are not applied in a benign way and face to face to a man. Yet both adjectives imply some level of FLR.

From my perspective it takes strength of character for a man to admit that he wants or needs his woman to be in charge of him. Sure, any man with bedroom fantasies will admit to wanting the woman to take charge during sex from time to time. But that is mostly unrelated to freely admitting to the unenlightened that he is submissive to his partner. It is like a homosexual who never comes out of the closet for fear of embarrassment.

I have read an “interview” by one of the best bloggers at
The person being interviewed is Ms. Rika, whom I admire greatly. As I have been advocating the true submission to women, this quote, out of context, is telling:
“…D/s is about what he does for me, not what I do to him. We judge the success of the D/s dynamic on how satisfied I am; and on how good a job he does in anticipating my needs and fulfilling them….”
Indeed, it is not about my need, but about her need that my submission should exist. This is what most men in what they assume to be FLR fail to understand. This is why budding FLRs fail. This is why most males just go into a tailspin after “they do all they can and the female just does not see the rewards or benefits of what they have so selflessly given.”

Men, read Ms. Rika’s writings, and you might get a clue. If, after reading all of her writings and the question/answer blogs you still think that you are slighted by your female partner, you may not be what you profess to be. I don’t take away from your need and willingness to submit, just that you need to become real. You need to understand and admit the truth. I am not advocating rules, contracts, etc. They are just fun trivia. What I am advocating is understanding your needs and wants, and those of your partner. All else is like frosting on a cake.

There is one more point to present before beating this subject to death. Some women are not capable, or are not willing to be in charge, which is what is definitely required in an FLR. A man who is trying to develop an FLR in relationship with such woman must at some point admit that. It is not necessarily the end of the world as far as he is concerned. If the relationship is strong and loving otherwise, the two can still play FLR from time to time. He can still remain as good as he was while he thought that he was in an FLR. She can accommodate some of his kinks and still receive the benefit. The adapted relationship is not as blatant as he may have expected, but it can still be fun and satisfying for both. This is especially true when considering the alternatives: complete abandonment of FLR, reverting to a resentful vanilla relationship with who-knows-who-is-in-charge, or divorce and subsequent search for a more agreeable partner.

In closing I return to the premise of this posting. FLRs, when successful, are so because at least one of the partners is committed to make it work at almost all cost. The other partner, if she or he buys into the relationship, need not do quite as much. Nevertheless, it does take two to have this relationship. This may be true for vanilla relationships, but as I said, the closer the D/S gets to 50-50, the less chance there is that it is viable.

No comments: