Saturday, July 3, 2010

Who Is In Charge?

I was reading the comments on “God Told Me”, June 27, 2010 at "whatevershesays" The comments have to do with a wife’s obedience to her husband and the so-called 50-50 relationships. I have no more problems with a wife totally obeying her husband than I have with a husband totally obeying his wife. In either case something is way out of whack, or the one or both of them are not quite sane.

Back in the dark ages including the fifties men used to think that they owned the world. Well, some did, or at least part of it, others were not that well endowed by power or riches. But all along, women ruled. They did not do so blatantly except in some cases. Generally they got their way by manipulating men. Even the stereotypical wife of the fifties TV crud did. You just had to look past the crisp aprons and high-heeled shoes that they wore while vacuuming the living room.

Now it is out in the open. Women still manipulate, but the men love it. If it is blatant, they love it even more. This is what FLR is about. However, the thing that has not changed is that not all women want leadership in a relationship. Some want input into decisions over the family, some just want to be told. Men never had a chance to give up leadership because of the socially accepted norms: man was in charge, if not, there was something wrong with him. Regardless of how much of an idiot he was, he was expected to be the head of the household.

Today we still have idiots of all genders. If, by some unfortunate turn of events they get to be in charge, they will muck up the relationship. Being an idiot or not wanting to be in charge is not gender specific. That is where marriages fail, and people end up with litters from various liaisons draining their energy and wasting attention rather than raising their children produced by one steady, responsible marriage.

I know I am pissing off a lot of you, for most marriages today are second and third. That is not my fault. So, be sensitive about it if you like. At least up to the fifties there was such idea as commitment: you made a decision, and you honored it, rather than go sniffing after another pussy once the one you got did not put out.

Then there is this politically correct (PC) idea of the so-called 50-50 marriages, which is the only PC alternative to FLR. I have some experience in civilian, military, and law enforcement management. In all cases a reasonably functioning organization had one person in charge. With the idea of 50-50, people would have been milling around without taking or accepting responsibility. In a 50-50 relationship nobody is in charge. When stuff happens, one does one thing, while the other does another, potentially mucking up the situation. People either must make rules, or follow them to a large extent. This is no different in a marriage.

In my marriage, I rely on my ability to honor my commitments. My only wife and I have children, and need not deal with ex wives and husbands or litters from former relationships. We don’t agree on everything, but we know that life is full of compromises, since nothing is perfect. I would love to be her total subject, one who belongs to her. I would love to be her love slave. I would love to serve her in all ways. Alas, that is no more than a sex fantasy. She makes decisions based on our mutual understanding of the facts, not because of what she has between her thighs. I could be in charge if I needed to be, but I defer to her. She is more intuitive than I am, so in most cases she makes the right decision about our family. As for finances, home repairs, dealing with the Sheriff, she gives me the opportunity to decide. Unless I am really unable to decide, I take care of them. She knows that our mutual benefit is my priority. She knows that she can override any decision I am about to make. She also knows where she is out of her element, and then I have to decide. This is not a 50-50 relationship. It is a rational and logical FLR. As for the bedroom scene, well, I would do anything to satisfy her. The way we have it is not quite satisfying for me. However, that does not mean that the FLR is over. As I said, nothing is perfect, but we work at it.

5 comments:

whatevershesays said...

Two quick comments:

I'm not sure that marriages in the 50's were better because of committment. Perhaps it's because divorce wasn't easy, readily acceptable and women didn't have paying jobs. (I'll concede that divorce has swung too far the other way and is too easy and socially acceptable so couples don't try as hard.)

I agree that even in a WLM there must be compromise and that the husband must "take over" when he is far superior at some task. The fantasy of a total male slave to his wife is just that,,,,a fantasy.

Susan's Pet said...

I picked the one cause that to me is the major reason for failed relationships. I agree that there are others. The one you bring up is also significant. However, I ask, “Is divorce more accepted today because it is easy, as you say, or is it because of lack of commitment?” When the going gets rough, divorce!

Divorce is easy. Dealing with the results is devastating when there are more people involved than the two who failed to make a go of it. Think of children who are torn between a number of adults, think of the anguish and anger, think of the wasted time, effort, money, and sometimes health because of stress.

I have a niece who married a divorced man. Admittedly, his former wife is an unbalanced harpy, but she has half custody of their teen-age daughter. My niece’s life and her husband’s life are a mess that they cannot afford. The child is confused, for she gets conflicting signals between her parents. My niece has a hard time being an authority to this half step child who also needs her love and support.

Easy divorce is the result of the cause of failure, which is lack of commitment. I addressed this issue in more depth at http://hersforever.blogspot.com/2007/11/commitment-in-relationship.html. You might want to read it.

Women today are more stressed and touchy than in the fifties. Back then they were “just wives”. Today, they are wives and also work full time jobs. So much for women’s liberation. I can see why she would want to be belligerent and give up when the going gets tough. Whether the man is a lazy slob who does not pull his weight at home, or he is a willing and useful partner, he may have a harder time dealing with this liberated woman. None of this changes human nature, just stresses their ability to deal with reality and fantasy. This is another major reason for failed relationships. Being 50-50 is not the solution to solve this problem.

Her Majesty's Plaything said...

"Today we still have idiots of all genders" Thank you. That sound you hear is me applauding!!! ;-)

Great post SP! What we have between our legs does not guarantee our superiority. This is true for women as well as men. I do not consider myself subservient to all women just because I identify as a submissive male. I love women. I adore them, I respect them and love pleasing them. If a women were looking for someone to smack her around and treat her like dirt (some definitely are) I would be totally the wrong choice for her. That said I run up against morons of all races and genders in all walks of life. I could never serve one and if one were to try and dominate me I would take them down a peg or two before telling them very politely (or not) to piss off!!

I choose to serve the woman I love. She is highly intelligent, has a ton of integrity, is a good and faithful friend, a wonderful mother, a terrific wife and also quite stunning. I consider myself to be incredibly fortunate to have her in my life. She is worthy of all the love, adoration and devotion I can give her. For both of us this is our first and only marriage. We will have 24 years together on the 20th of this month.

Her Majesty does not want me to be always in the submissive role. Sometimes she wants me to take charge and when she does I am more than up to the task. Sometimes she needs me to be her comforter and protector. I am much more than a fawning submissive to her. She is the woman I love and I treat her as such not just as some archetype of a dominant goddess.

We have a real marriage and we are real people. So the balance of power tends to shift and move around sometimes. But for the most part she calls the shots. She has a very strong personality and is pretty type A. She is naturally dominant. I on the other hand can be dominant when necessary but am naturally rather laid back and more of a type B. We were already kind of in an FLR before we even knew what the term meant. Sexually I love to worship women and I am something of a masochist. It all fits together naturally. Most days it just kind of works. But it also requires hard work and genuine commitment on both of our parts to maintain.

A marriage needs to be valued and nurtured in order to survive. It is not just about archetypal role play reinforcing who is dominant or who is submissive. We are two human beings who love and care for each other first and foremost. Everything else comes second.

Susan's Pet said...

HMP,

We are a dying breed. About your comment, I could not have said it better myself. I am glad there is at least one person out there who agrees. I am also glad that you have found and kept the love of your life. It seems that most men change partners like they change cell phones: always upgrading to the newest gimmicks and abandoning the perfectly good older models.

Serving B said...

Susan's Pet:

You are so right. Divorce rates have sky rocketed in the past 100 years. One thing that has helped speed things along - making divorce legal. Yes, if you happened to be married in South Carolina in 1948, you had no legal way to end a marriage. Nothing like the long arm of the government to instill lasting commitment in couples. Thankfully, reason prevailed. That the divorce rate has grown doesn't surprise me. What I can't get my head around is how so many people entered into marriage without a legal option to end a marriage in the first place. Talk about love being blind.

Seriously, I admire those who remain happily married through thick and thin [emphasis upon happily, here]. Do I agree with you that "most men change partners like they change cell phones: always upgrading to the newest gimmicks and abandoning the perfectly good older models"? Nope.