Do men actually desire their girlfriend,partner,significant other submit to them?

Question

does this create a more fulfilling partnership?neither partner being the inferior counterpart but simply to help strengthen the bond of the relationship by asserting different roles?is this idea of submission quite wise at least in the most idealistic sense ie.a man of integrity,good character and well educated and a woman of similar virtue?does it only become an issue when it comes to people of lower socio economic status,less educated which abuse the principle behind it leading to domestic violence and a life of slavish compliance to men who don't love them for the women.surely this idea was perhaps written not just as an oppressive idea but was for the application of the most regal and honourable individuals?as with all divine doctrine however it is human beings in themselves that have perverted it through their own ignorance and lack of personal discipline and spiritual responsiblity.surely it came from good intent not just an attempt by the patriarchy to stamp on women?

I think any heterosexual female has some kind of desire to be vulnerable and protected by a strong yet virtuous male,men want to hold and women to be held.i don't think that intrinsic need comes from mere brainwashing or social learning theories.Old hollywood films with Audrey Hepburn and Bette Davis perfectly display the fluid dynamic between the sexes and the way it should be.Women weren't treated as lesser then in these movies but as complimentary and were respected.Is submission such a degrading existance?or is a homogenised world where to express the deepest needs of the sexes is denied degrading?is submitting wrong?

Men what do you wish for ?

random 6x7 i think there's a way of expressing your opinion,i wasn't saying that all women want that lifestyle,so i don't really understand your need to be abrasive and argumentative,just state your opinion respectfully instead of 'just because you like the idea' that response seems quite childish and confrontational to me,i'm sorry i offended your sensibilities,but there is a way of handling things and i for one certainly prefer intelligent discussion,consideration of others view points to sheer rudeness.you know perhaps i just like S&m you know?whats wrong with a gal with a penchant for a little domination?hhhmm

and in talking of people with a lower socio economic status,with affluence comes education and with education comes knowledge and insight into the abstract principles of life.in this day and age i suppose its the case that information is so widely available that it doesn't matter which strata of society you occupy,but my point is really related to less educated people who i often find are more prone to being argumentative,uncivil,morally corrupt,indifferent to ethical truths.There are people at the other end of the scale that are just like this but i see that as an attainment of self esteem before character,which seems to be the cse with alot of people in society.These are just my personal observations,entirely the illusions of my own head perhaps??but yes thats what i think!

its really not pomposity or arrogance,i was just presenting an idea for discussion.from my experience,ive had friends from different walks of life and if ive ever talked about a refined idea or a higher principle to them,they either disagree wholeheartedly with the words of a very wise person just out of some arbitrary whim taking no real thought or consideration to whats been said.i wasn't speaking about spiritual leaders of the world you know

i dislike nugatory pettyness and smallmindedness and those that tear others down,i think education makes people less likely to behave like that,i really do!

i'm sorry you feel so angry inside

Answer 1

I prefer to think that the relationships I have had and certainly the one I am now in, have been based on each of us doing what we do beswt and sharing the rest of the jobs between us. In our house, I do the cooking and the ironing, my partner does the washing-up and the washing. All other tasks such as dusting and hoovering are done by whoever is available at the time. If she is working, I do it and vice versa. It is not a question of submission, just partnership.

Answer 2

My perspective:
I don't want a wimp for a wife. Men and women are different, yes. Our gender roles are defined by society, not some physiological need for subordination or superiority.

In my life all of the women that I have loved (including mum and grandma) have been strong, independent people and so when choosing a mate I looked for those same qualities.

Your statement about spousal abuse being a problem in lower socio-economic strata is either naive or elitist, I can't tell.The rich abuse their spouses as regularly as the poor they're just more likely to hide it well.

Woman is not to man as man is to god, woman is to man as equal is to equal. Patriarchy relies on the old trick of nostalgia for a time that never existed. Women have historically been made subordinate by the fact that they are physically weaker than men. This is no model for enlightened people to follow.

I desire a woman who is my equal. People who love each other take care of their partners. It is not an exclusive female gender role to be loving and caring and wash the dishes. To be tender is not a sign of weakness, rather it is a sign of love.

Answer 3

Submit out of desire because you choose to. Like my outlook on relationships. I prefer to be a partner out of choice not out of need. There are roles that each may be able to do better not gender related. There is nothing wrong with establishing who wants what role and as a team count on each other to do what is needed in your union of the hearts. Expectation is a whole different subject. I am against expectation, and for appreciation.

Answer 4

First off, just because you like the idea of submitting to and being protected by a virtuous man, doesn't mean the rest of us are into it. Some women like being submissive, some men like it, and many of us just prefer the idea of an equal partnership. I mean, I'm good at some stuff. A guy I date may be good at others. Why shouldn't he defer to me on things that I know more about, and vice versa? That's the sort of relationship that works best for me. It might not appeal to you, but that's cool. We're both heterosexual women; we're never going to date. What I like has no bearing on you.

Secondly, seriously? Less educated people of a lower socio-economic status aren't as virtuous and wise as highly educated rich people? Um, Abraham Lincoln versus George W. Bush. Gandhi versus Osama bin Laden. Jesus versus Nero. High birth and education is hardly a guarantee of virtue.

ETA: You said that men want their women to submit. You said that all heterosexual women just want to be protected by a strong, wise man. You also attribute this to divine doctrine. Where weren't you saying that all women want this lifestyle? And if I'm "abrasive", it's because I'm insulted both by your assumption that you know what all women want (which you were implying) and by your put-downs of people of lower education and socio-economic status. Pomposity and arrogance annoys me.

Answer 5

It's important to make a distinction between submission and inferiority.

You submit to a police officer, but that doesn't mean you are inferior to him or her.
You submit to a paramedic during an emergency, but that doesn't mean you are inferior to him or her.
You submit to a surgeon on the operating table, but that doesn't mean you are inferior to him or her.
You submit to a professor in a university classroom, but that doesn't mean you are inferior to him or her.
You submit to a commanding officer on the battlefield, but that doesn't mean you are inferior to him or her.

Submission is about authority and responsibility, not inferiority/superiority. A healthy submission is one which promotes orderly activity, prompt decision making and is beneficial to all parties working toward a common goal.

The dim bulbs have no chance of understanding this; to the rest of you, I hope this helps.

Answer 6

well, i know that i have NO desire whatsoever to be vulnerable. i prefer to be strong & able to take care of things on my own.

not all men want their partner to submit to them. my husband doesn't. if i didn't run the house, it would fall to peices. i certainly don't *dominate* him, but i'm nowhere NEAR submissive. things have to get done & if i don't make sure they do (or at least remind him about them), then it's quite likely they won't.

Answer 7

Everything in your question makes perfect sense, until you get to the end. There is no such thing as "the patriarchy."

Graphomania is treatable, by the way.

Answer 8

Did you know that females of the squirrel monkeys have a pseudo-penis which they use to show their dominance over other monkeys, just like males? Food for thought.

Answer 9

I agree that we got to submit. I am indian and a perfect home maker though am single. I can do everything for the man and have no qualms about it. My mom and grand mom and their moms did it. I dont worry. I love to do it. It makes me feel so womanly. :)

Answer 10

not all men want that. if you want to submit to your boyfriend you can but it doesn't mean all women want to.

I think most women wouldn't do it. who can blame them, they've been doing that for thousands of years.

id rather have a woman who could take care of herself. and not be weak or helpless.