Dominant and Submissive Equity Equality?

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. 

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.

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!

I wish I could find a girlfriend not miserable

I wish I could find a girlfriend not miserable