Honey, You Need Not Change A Thing!

A comment on an earlier post was from Helpmate Hubbie in the form of a question, “

"i'm curious as to what changes you would most like to see made?”

My answer began with,

“Asking this question could be rephrased as, ‘What is your favorite fantasy?’”

I would love to answer either of these questions, but I will not do so in the current context.

If you have read enough of my blog, then you know that I am somewhat of a jaundiced realist when it comes to FLR. The reason is that only a very few FLRs are what we could define in a somewhat strict sense, “A relationship in which a dominant female assumes and maintains leadership, and a submissive male follows her in all respects.” There are different flavors of this, and I am trying to live one.

Life is change. We evolve, develop, adapt. Nothing is wrong with trying to improve your situation. However, there is something odd about what we are trying to do. Maybe it’s the reason for trying to change, maybe it’s the method, and maybe it’s just the details. Here is how I see a submissive man trying to phase his life into an FLR.

How do I serve Thee? Let me count the ways.

Not in any particular order:

• You need not change a thing, just enjoy my devoted servitude.
• Acknowledge my services in cleaning, cooking, caring for the children, washing your car, etc.
• Tease me and deny me.
• Make me hand wash your underwear.
• Discipline me if I fail to serve you well.
• Take over all sex.
• Have sex in the kitchen, living room, dining room, broom closet, … with always you on top.
• Demand oral sex daily.
• Demonstrate your being in charge to friends and strangers but only in subtle ways.
• Take over handling family affairs, finances, and all decisions.
• Share me with your female friends for servitude.
• Have sex with other males and females.
• Share me with your male and female lovers.
• Have wild D/S, B/D, CBT, water play, and etc. sessions often.
• Make me wear feminine clothes.
• Keep me naked.
• Demand that I lick your toes.
• Demand long body and foot massages.

I am not suggesting that all submissive men want all of these and nothing else but these. I am not in any way trying to make fun of wanting or needing any of this. There is an overlap in various needs and desires between us. However, if you don’t have at least a few of these “rules” in your mind, you are not even trying to be in an FLR.

Some men are satisfied to be a leader in a relationship, and play with some of these rules occasionally. In a way it is somewhat like the closet transvestite who will dress, admire himself in the mirror, then put it away until next time. Between sessions he is all vanilla but with the tension building. Those of us who want something longer lasting will have to make sacrifices. This is were voluntary servitude comes in. The place where I draw the line is claiming that our women need not change a thing, but just to enjoy the benefits.

It takes two to have a relationship. The only time that most or all of these get turned around is when the woman initiates the FLR, and trains her man to follow. “To dream the impossible dream …” OK, it could happen. I have seen some writing on it, and I don’t know how much is just a man’s fantasy. Most realistic writing appears to be about what I presented here. The man struggles against odds, reminiscent of his sperm swimming upstream with almost no chance of reaching and completing its goal. But the way to get there can be fantastic!

I ask you,

"How do you separate fantasy FLR from a real one?"

"Do you care?"

"Do you know when you have finally arrived?"

At the beginning I said that I will not answer the two questions in this context. The reason is because, if I were to say that I want to change something, then it would be an automatic admission that I am not satisfied. It would also say that I would want my female partner to change in order to satisfy me. That just goes against all my my rules. That's not saying that my FLR is perfect according to my rules, just that my rules do not allow me to change it by my own decree. There is a subtle but real difference.

Pontification #2: Relationships

In my post on Commitment I pointed out that it takes two to have a relationship, and that both partners must be committed and remain supportive. What I did not say was what kind of relationship. The reason for that was because I wanted to explore the subject later, which in part brings me to this posting.

Merriam-Webster has three definitions for the word, but my preferred one is “… the relation connecting or binding participants in a relationship.” It is circular in a way, but fits my current reasoning. I will take that to expose an underlying principle.

In any relationship there is tension, and a subsequent struggle to resolve the tension. One participant may be satisfied by the resolution, but the other may end up with more tension as a result. I could write a book about this, but would rather get to the point before I lose the readers’ interest.

The only way a resolution would satisfy both partners all of the time is if, on the dominance scale, one partner was one hundred percent and the other zero (100-0). The dominant would decide and all would be well. It turns out that humans are not that way, so we must compromise.

Why does any relationship work, even temporarily?

On the short term we don’t get too perturbed by things not turning out the way we expect. We keep hoping that they will be better and maybe try to do something to make it so. But if they keep going that way, after a while we have enough, and want to change.

On the long term, assuming that we got over the short term annoyances, we develop a working relationship: “you do this and that for me”, and in return “I do that and this for you.” As long as both comply with the assumed and developing rules of behavior, the relationship can last a long time. As mundane as this sounds, this covers all ranges of dominance and submission. The key issue here is that both participants get what they want out of the relationship. Neither is forced, either may quit, but they continue because generally they are both getting much of what they want. It is unlikely to be perfect, but it works.

I will take an example from my previous jobs to illustrate the point. A workplace is not a democracy. When I accept employment I am obligated to follow local rules and produce a product that my employer can use to make profit. Change any of this and either my employer or I are breaking the contract. In more simple terms, I do what I am told to do, otherwise I am out. If the employer is unethical or does not support my needs to produce, I find another job. Wow, that is some power exchange!

A marriage is somewhat like that, but has other layers of interdependence and complexity. There is love, lust, friendship, habit, mutual responsibility, etc. But the same rules apply as in any other relationship: both participants must get what they want, otherwise it does not work. Even strongly committed persons will give up if there are irreconcilable differences.

So how does a successful relationship work where others fail? I have heard of, read about, and seen in movies 50-50 marriages that supposedly worked. Marriage is a subset of a relationships, so all that applies to marriage does not apply to relationships in general. In this 50-50 marriage, fictional stories aside, both partners must be detached in order for the relationship to survive. This to me implies “impersonal”, “clinical”, “nothing but rational”, non-involved living and continual negotiations. It is fake, or the end of a formerly loving marriage. The union remains only for economical, financial, or some legal (having children in common) mutual obligation until such obligations are dissolved. Screw the 50-50 marriage. It is fake.

The following numbers are not based on scientific data. I am making them up only to illustrate my point. If a marriage does not have at least a 60-40 power balance, it is deathly dull. On the other hand, many marriages don’t survive a 60-40 or more diverse power balance. Either because the wrong person has the 60, or both want to have the 60 percent or more of power. Those that survive have figured out that one of the partners is more or less in charge, and the other complies. Hmm … What a novel idea! Too bad ideas cannot be patented.

In a Dominant/Submissive relationship the power exchange is more 80-20, or even 90-10. It is really never 100-0 for any length of time except maybe during a scene. But even then we don’t know for sure.

Female Led Relationship (FLR) is a subset of all relationships between a male and a female. In my next Pontification, if you are still around to read it, I will show you why FLR seems to work, and try to explode a related myth.