Dominant and Submissive Equity Equality?

I do not recognise the traits as being related to dominance and submissiveness, to me they suggest 'being  a sociopathic git' and 'being a scientist', respectively.

I wish I could find a girlfriend not miserable

This stuff doesn’t work for Autistics from what I can tell. The “reasoning” is quite specific to NeuroTypical social games steeped in competition which includes games in the relationship to keep it fun and to deal with competition from the outside. It’s certainly not everyone and there’s the rare chance someone hasn’t been taught how to make a decision. But we’re here discussing dominant/submissive types and I brought up a symbiotic arrangement as example.

This would be too exhausting IMO. Better to find a significant other with a shared lifestyle or you’ll be miserable 100% of the time!

JuniperFromGallifrey said:

There's this reasoning men like to win, so she'll default to a seemingly passive setting, allowing the other to make guesses until guessing correctly.

Tbh a bit steriotyped there no? From my point of view the woman is just pushing the interlectual labour onto the man while retaining a strong basis to complain about the compromise the man comes up with. She forces a compromise but gets to complain about it as if the man chose it to suit him self. Better to just take turns and acept from time to time you won't like it. I mean if every time I pick hooters and she picks a vegan cafe we'll be happy 50% of the time and missrable 50% of the time. and its a basis for us to find places we both like so we can pick those hoping the other person will pick it too next time.

JuniperFromGallifrey said:

Apparently, working hard for a win, like a video game, keeps the relationship strong.

I doubt men actually feel that way at all beyond the initial date phase of a relationship. And the only reasion they want to feel winning over a girls initial atention was hard is because monogamy and exclusivity is very important to most people. They want to feel some one else won't easily come along and steal her from them.

i dunno even then it doesnt seem right as a husband that can lift heavy stuff wont stand by as his wife struggles to lift something. partners make up for one anothers strengths and weaknesses, what one cant do the other can do. a difference between each other that patches each others weaknesses and as a whole makes you without weak spots. therefore difference is a strength as it patches each others weaknesses. what one is weak at, it isnt bad to be weak at it, because it means they are strong at something else and the other half is strong at what they are weak at. covering each other gaps perfectly..... thats actually probably more towards equity than equality, and in that case equity is the superior thing while equality just makes you both the same so you will not gain much benefit from it as you will have same strengths same weaknesses and no real advantage to partnership. so equity is definitely more favourable on that.

Human rights equality and equal, we wouldn’t be the same I was reading up on the legalities of marriage it’s legally binding when a prenup is involved. I was saying in regards being treated equally and fairly in the partnership/ marriage/civil partnership etc respect etc. (whilst in the relationship) to be treated fairly and equally wouldn’t make us the same or boring? Attract and repel is genetics human attraction it’s not your hard wired to what ever your attracted to etc 

Caelus said:

like how one opposite part of a magnet attracts the other but repels the same. difference attracts. if we had equity or equality were we are all the same, wed not function as well and we wouldnt gel together. no attract all repel. 

All lasting relationships (healthy or not) are symbiotic. Everyone gets something they want. Often, it's not a question of our better qualities in alignment but psychoanalysts will often suggest that when 2 Dysfunctions work in a pairing it makes for a lasting relating-with. This isn't always the case, but it is relatively typical. Most people don't always find time to grow and become better selves. 

Sometimes when one person has an overbearing job, they'd like to come home to a more dominant spouse to handle their home life. Too much responsilbility might mean I'm happy to relinquish it to a partner. There's always an exchange. Some might have been raised with one controlling parent and expect this one to make decisions when they get married. 

But really, no relationship is ever exactly fair. One makes more money or always does the dishes. If you can find ways to make things balance, perhaps we each do the thing we're good at and pick up the extra because it's how we prefer to live. The best you can hope for is to find shared fundamental values (where is the line for cheating, what do we mean by being 'truthful', what does respect look like). 

If one person feels bullied, they'll either work out how to leave or find ways to retaliate. However, as per @Peter's remark here, when a typical woman says 'I don't know' but also provides several 'no's' until you state the correct answer, she's playing an adult version of warmer/colder. There's this reasoning men like to win, so she'll default to a seemingly passive setting, allowing the other to make guesses until guessing correctly. This happens in a million other ways, same system, earning a gold star in some way. Apparently, working hard for a win, like a video game, keeps the relationship strong. It's never occurred to me to play, but I've watched it happen both before and after I had been told how it works. 

i dunno i think we all have our place, and if a person is a sub theyd likely like to be dominated by a dom. they would be bored with others subs.

so its a symbiotic relationship in which you need difference.... kinda like how a male really needs a female for natural production reasons and for the body naturally urging them together. male and female are different, but thats the only true natural working reproductive relationship... requires the difference. 

like how one opposite part of a magnet attracts the other but repels the same. difference attracts. if we had equity or equality were we are all the same, wed not function as well and we wouldnt gel together. no attract all repel. 

That’s is weird if that is the case, I had a stalker hacker, but it kept calling me the sub? It got me thinking how is that eqaulity or equity if the relationship is based on hierarchy your never had equity or equality? It would be inequality?

1. Dominant

Dominant personality types are goal-oriented, decisive, and competitive. They care more about results than personal relationships. They might not send you a holiday card, but if you deliver on your commitments, you’ll maintain a healthy business relationship. Dominants care deeply about the bottom line.

People with dominant personality types are also relatively impatient and controlling. They want information — fast — so they can make a decision and move on.

4. Submissive

Those with a submissive personality type love data, facts, and figures. As no-nonsense people, they’ll look past a flowery pitch and get straight to the facts. Be prepared to field a lot of detailed questions possible at arm’s length prior to any face to face meeting.

Submissives stick to their deadlines, but they do not make decisions quickly. They care about thoroughly vetting and understanding the options available to them, and won’t jump the gun on a decision. They are more logical and cautious than any other personality type — but once they make a decision, they won’t reverse it

Submissive personality traits:

Submissives are concerned with facts rather than emotion, and won’t spend time getting to know you on a personal level. In conversation, submissives are serious, direct, and formal and often like to be dealt with at arm’s length.

from my understanding in a dom/sub relationship both sides agree and the submissive actually wants to be submissive or treated in a weird way like that...

The thing about the equality act is it only applies to professional relationships. Employee / employer. Business / customer. Educator / student. Charity / charity user. Police / suspect. Etc. strictly speaking the equality act doesn’t say anything about submission or dominance as personality traits or sexual preferences. If someone being submissive / dominant was a deeply held ideological belief or something arising out of a disability then it might become tanlgently relevant to The act.

I was just speaking to my mum in regards husband and wife dynamic she agrees it’s equality and listening to each other , are Google the serotonin kind regards   

Yeh there’s always these dynamics. Haven’t really ever been in a long term relationship but I’m sure it has its ups and downs. Don’t know much about dominance and submissiveness in relationships either. But I suppose in life you get people who are more dominant and people who are more submissive. I read a piece in a book that Jordan Peterson wrote where he says that the more serotonin someone has in they’re brain the more dominant they tend to be in life and the higher on the social ladder they tend to be. Could be true. Jordan Peterson is a clever guy in my opinion. He’s said a lot about this before. Maybe you should read one of his books or watch him speaking on YouTube if you want to know more about relationship dynamics as he might be of use to you in that respect. 

I think it’s the equality act 2010 I believe please correct me if I’m wrong 

Ive been reading:-

https://www.family-lawfirm.co.uk/blog/what-does-marriage-mean-legally/#

That went sexual quickly, thanks for the feeding in, I believe in eqaulity and fairness and eqaul, the person online kept calling me a sub or your the sub? I googled it, but got me thinking. it’s listening to each other being fair, there must be some equality law is there? What ever relationship set up making sure equality and fairness? 

Peter said:

Well in a sexual context often a submisive (in the sexual sence) has more power than the dominant. They have the safe word, the magic stop button that brings the whole sexual experence to a halt. And to keep the experence going the dominant has to think about what the sub wants and needs out of the experence. I imagine a submisive / dominant relationship in marrage might work the same way.

https://www.fidelity.com/learning-center/smart-money/equal-partners-in-marriage

Well in a sexual context often a submisive (in the sexual sence) has more power than the dominant. They have the safe word, the magic stop button that brings the whole sexual experence to a halt. And to keep the experence going the dominant has to think about what the sub wants and needs out of the experence. I imagine a submisive / dominant relationship in marrage might work the same way. A wife (it could be a husband but lets go with typical gender roles to simplify language), a wife might 'submit' by allowing her husband to make all the desisions, but that doesn't mean if she's not happy with the results of those desisions he won't know about it. He will. She will make his life misserable if he makes dessisions with out considering her needs.

Just because a woman doesn't tell you what to do it doesn't mean she won't tell you when you are doing something she doesn't like. This leads the infuriating 'so where do you want to eat?' ... 'oh you choose!' ... 'How about A? ... 'No.' ... 'How about B.' ... 'No.' ... 'Well where do want to go?' ... 'Where ever you want I don't mind.'

Personally I think colaberative desision making is better. And in reality traditional relationships tended to devide desision making with the husband and wife having difrent domains of compitance. I can see the argument for that. 2 people trying to make 100% of the desisions together is a lot more stressful than 2 people each making 50% of the disisons on their own.

Submission, in the sence of defering dissions to others, doesn't always put you at risk of exploitation if you have leavers to make the desiding party care about your needs and wellbeing.