Female led relationships are often relationships where the woman resents the man. Because the man lacks masculinity and leadership, the woman feels obligated to take on that role herself. Which goes against her biology and therefore would exhaust her to some extent. There is a reason why the majority of women want a dominant man as a leader. Because it allows women to remain in their feminine state and feel relieved knowing they are leaning on a man with merrit. Don't listen to the woketard feminists who claim otherwise. The fact they are miserable in their lives goes to show you shouldn't take anything they say.
In any way, women who often get with men who would lean back with their feet above the ground are often settling for their lesser desirable men. Despite that these men are good providers with decent jobs, they still lack the traits of an actual leader and would leave the big decision making to the woman (out of fear of what she would think) instead of putting that burden on themselves. In my experience, these women often have a history of dating very masculine men or bad boys. Now why did they forsake that for some submissive man who would rather say "whatever you want" instead of "this is how it will be because of XYZ"? Well, because they have realized they are not going to get the commitment from these bad boys and the (biological) clock is ticking. So it is a matter of anything is better than nothing.
I would never in a million years let a woman lead in my relationship. Not just because I have a dominant personality, but because I know for a fact that this will often cause disasters on the long run. Many good men out there who provide, yet we see them get cheated on or simply deal with a naggy and resentful woman who makes you question if she actually loves him (which in many cases is not the case).
OK, restating my answer from here:
IS it wrong for the male to be submissive in the relationship?
Sadly, YES, it is wrong. Because you are basically painting a proverbial target or "KICK ME" sign on yourself and setting yourself up to be abused and conned or otherwise taken advantage of.
And I am not knocking you; I actually get your desire to have a "mommy wife" who will give you the nurturing you perhaps never had when smaller, but you could still have sex with. Or if it is not that but some other aspect to it that floats your proverbial boat, so be it. But MOST women, nay nearly all women, are not like that.
Moreover, such women, if they are real and motivated to do this, would not really care for you as a "Loving Female Authority", and they would only use and abuse you, and they would only take you for what you have, materially and otherwise.
Or perhaps you could visit the mercenary sex workers. Now that isn't necessarily bad, as long as it is an honest quid pro quo and you actually get to meet her and "play". (Beware of the "FinDomme" fakers who are just trying to swindle you out of your money.)
In short, there is a reason most people are "Vanilla". It is much safer.
On a funnier note, the reality is never what you imagined. See "Fantasy vs. Reality" cartoon below:
I heard of it happening a lot (not talking in bed, sex is a little part of a serious relationship) with the woman taking over, also because the man lets her. With her over time taking initiative to everything, the social, what to have in their home, what to invest in, how the cleaning should be done. Micromanaging everything.
They usually don't last because in the end the woman will get tired of taking care of the man, especially if they have kids together and she has to take all the responsibility. The man always asking what to do, and if the woman does not take initiative nothing is done. The men are ok in it, at least they don't ask for divorce, unless they find another woman who can take over. The woman often eventually divorce, so she only has to take care of the kids and herself.
What the hell is a 'female led relationship'. The fact that you are against them means that you are for male led relationships?
I'm against all domination and control. F that.
Opinion
53Opinion
Well, yeah, for SEX! IN 1977 I met an attractive 45 year old woman when I was 30 that picked me up to be part of her sex life. She liked breaking YOUNGER men into her "erotic arts". It was clear that this was a sex ONLY relationship as she was already married and had permission to satisfy her high libido with "kinky adventures". She made it clear that normal sex was for her primary man. Each week I had to get a passing grade to move on to the next week. She was stunning in her enjoyment of sex. She could have orgasms from anal licking alone. She TAUGHT me to lick her AFTER she had already had sex. Then I had to lick after we had sex. I could ONLY have intercourse if her primary man was FIRST! She had multiple screaming orgasms that spun me up into a state of "PRIMAL MALE ECSTASY"! I could experience far more pleasure by being just part of her pleasure than I could get from my 1 "silly male orgasm". SHE taught me the JOY of being part of someone else's JOY. Her "dirty words" were like MAGIC. As soon as she said them, I WANTED to do everything that she said. I had to learn to talk dirty or my requests (I had to ask permission) would be IGNORED! WOW! She was so aggressive, I could enjoy being totally submissive to a woman's SUPERIOR desires! I lasted 12 weeks before I was transferred for a new job. She said, "YOU are the only man that made it to week 3 because you had such STRONG responses to my wanton displays and dirty words. At week 3, I brazenly accepted her as my GODDESS, naked, and on my knees, as she was still fully clothed. She accepted me as her SEX SLAVE! And, she noted that I actually ENJOYED her taunting and teasing (heightening my pleasure) and performance many ORAL PLEASURES FOR HER while the others feigned interest. She called me her BAHL and DFCL! She was my goddess or WFC. She liked that title.
Hell, I was almost in one. Or I guess I technically WAS in one but it really would have built this dynamic later. I was a C student training to be an electrical engineer. She was a valedictorian training to be a neurosurgeon. I might make about 100k now, but for her, a half-mil was more in her sights.
We had actually talked about it a bit. Her hours would make her home time inconsistent, whereas my job would have consistent hours and I could work remotely. So we had basically come to the conclusion that I would be a stay-at-home dad. I had it planned out, too. I would do home renovations, general around-the-house repairs, make the place a smart house, and design gadgets and such in my spare time. If we had kids, I would have more of the kid duty.
Honestly I didn't mind the idea too much. But it takes the right mindset. For one, you have to understand what it's like to be wanted more than "needed". This is what freaks a lot of guys out, because we feel like if we aren't "needed", we'll be disposed of. So we feel like we need to out-earn her, take charge, make all the big decisions. I'm not saying it wouldn't be freaky. But if I felt content in my desirability, it wouldn't be too bad.
Relationships don't magically work. A relationship works because the people in it are willing to work together to make it work. A relationship in that way is very much like a business relationship. So a FLR or any other type of relationship can work if the people in it are willing to put in the work to make it work.
One of the big things I have noticed is that people tend to question if a given relationship will work, criticize other people relationships and that creates a serious issue. Because they end up so focused on everyone else's relationship then their own. So they stop making their relationship work and then wonder why it's falling apart.
Frankly dude, let me school you. There is what women SAY they want and there is what they want. They are different. Women always give the "socially acceptable" response to ANY question. Women are essentially insecure and social. They care very much what others think of them which is why the socially acceptable response thing. But they also feel what they feel. They want a man to somewhat dominate them. Female led relationships are thus inherently unstable. Of course and thus short term. Of course there are ALWAYS exceptions-but for the great masses out there this holds true.
Completely ludicrous , some utter soft cock who is unable to take responsibility and lead , women expect a strong male leader , who can lead them in the correct direction , they may push the boundaries from time to time , but women want and need to be lead.
The scenario described would be an horrendous outcome.
It can and does work for some. Finding the right partner is obviously important. Not a lot of women are interested in a loving FLR. Most aren't raised to consider such a relationship, and from what's left, many have hatred towards men (which isn't FLR, that's abuse).
I've had a couple of FLR's, but in all honesty, I really only learned what type of partners don't work for me.
I mean, sure, I guess an "FLR" doesn't sound too bad, but why does a relationship have to led by either side? Why not both sides contribute as much as they can. My girlfriend works and make most of out money, but I also work. It's only part time since I'm still studying in college, but I still do what I can. Since she's usually at work, I do shopping and groceries, but we both cook. And that's just how we usually do it. We have no set roles, we just do what we can.
I’m all for it since most of my relationships my lady was in charge because I don’t like telling people what to do when I don’t need to. But I just tell them let me play the part in public since people now days won’t fully accept it and would say I’m weak for letting my woman be in charge and blah blah. All I ask is if we’re at a get together just make my plate and if my cup is empty or almost empty just get a new full cup. Do you know how many people thought I was in charge of my girl but really behind the scene I was making sure my girl came home to a hot meal before I worked my night shift ☺️
Sounds boring to me... I think I wouldn't be able to help myself and move on to a man who's more dominant.
Men complain that they don't know what women actually want and when presented with the option of a woman initiating what she wants and telling you when she wants it (you), y'all wimp out?
I don't get it.
No, I couldn't do it I need to have my own money and I think I would rather split the chores with my future girl I only agree with cooking because I actually do enjoy cooking and baking but I definitely think we should also split turns in the kitchen.
Not interested in the slightest, but I don't like oppose people doing them or anything. Its just not for me. Is MLR a common term, as well? Never seen it described like this but it seems like an accurate way of describing my relational interests (for romantic relationships, at least).
This is going to sound so conflicted, but as much of a feminist as I am (2nd wave feminism), I actually think that I am more traditional when it comes to relationships, and I prefer the guy to “lead”.
Not entirely sure I get this. It seems wrong to be looking at a relationship in these terms. Perhaps because it sounds like a competition. But if she's more comfortable taking the lead in some respects, let her. Takes the stress off you, right?
If however she wants to totally dominate the relationship. Well that gets old real fast, I can tell you.
I think it´s just something for certain guys that don´t have a backbone or are willing to depend on a woman just for being in a relationship.
I doubt that would work for the majority of guys and also for not many women.
Being submissive is not just in bed. It's a lifestyle choice. I am embarking on a Female Led Relationship. This is after my moment of Ego Destruction. I lived a lie to my own self many years. I thought of myself as an overly masculine alpha (nothing wrong with being masculine - but when you have over inflation of that you are living a lie). In tears, lots of tears I forgave myself. I am a Submissive. I need a woman to keep me in line. I need to know what obedience is and to obey women. I want to show my love through submission. That right there is humility and it will keep your Ego in check or forever destroyed. I wan to keep my Ego destroyed. So, I am forever a Submissive.
Everytime i see women who is leading she's always competing with men and is very masculine herself, aggressive trying to prove herself being alpha in some way.
To me it looks unhealthy and insecurities too much desire for power and control, just bad person to around in general.
If that means she knows where she wants to eat, or she doesn't make you guess what's wrong, or she initiates sex more often... I don't see any disadvantage in that. :) I'm sure that's not what you mean, but I don't see a problem anyway. It's evidenced by now that women can lead. If your woman can lead—and you can follow—why not do it?
Partners should do fifty-fifty. There's no other way. Matriarchy and patriarchy, both have their own bright and dark sides. A successful relationship, in my opinion, is the one where partners have equal footing.
A relationship can work if both people agree on their roles, whatever those roles may be.
You can also add your opinion below!
