Published on 12, July, 2020
In relationships there are always different dynamics which either make it work or not make it work, we also have modern concepts and loads of different types of family setups with modern day society but it got me thinking how can you insure equality/equity and fairness within a friendship marriage or relationship if it’s based on dominant and submissive?
How can dominant and submissive be equity and equality? Or if one person is oppressed into being the submissive or bullied to be submissive? That is not equality or equity and your never have fairness?
All the time it’s dominant and submissive that isn’t equality your have a inequality not fairness?
https://www.proaptivity.com/four-personality-types/
My mum and dad had a good relationship based on equality, love and understanding, eqaul.
Also some peoples views on what love is or their perspective of what love is is warped as mentioned in the dating with disabilities peice. Love and sex are two different things, In any relationship it should be equal be it a marriage friendship or acquaintance.
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.
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
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/#
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.