The cuddle hormone? It's possible, of course, but after 57 years happily married to the same woman I've realised that C.S.Lewis was right. He said, "Marriages fail not for lack of love but for lack of obedience."
He had it back to front, of course. It's not the wife who must learn to be obedient but *sob* the husband.
(Lewis was very quotable but he was a dreadful old misogynist.)
Haven't heard it put quite like that before. Ogden Nash, wise man that he was, had this advice for newly wed husbands: "To keep your marriage flowing with love in the loving cup, whenever you're wrong admit it, whenever you're right, shut up!"
Although I can see how obedience and misogynist tendencies could go hand in hand, im not sure that they have to be. I wouldn't have a problem requiring obedience from my woman. I don't see it as misogynistic. Especially when she's more than willing to give it. No?
I'll have to ask Mrs Didge what I think about that. >:-/
Romanian peasant, marries, drives his bride home in their buggy, horse balks at a big pothole and has to be coaxed pas it. "That's once," says the peasant. Half a mile down the road there's an even bigger pothole and the horse again balks. Peasant pulls out his rifle and shoots the horse dead. His bride is horrified. "You monster!" she cries. "How could you do that to a horse." Peasant looks at her impassively and says, "That's once!"
Unless you don't understand what im saying, which I find difficult to believe judging from the clarity of most of your posts, ill have to think that you are purposely misrepresenting my point.
Ah well see there's sexual obedience which can be a *choice* and there's obedience that's born of a lack of appropriate or healthy nurture and damaging cultural expectations and conditioning.. One might argue that in some countries, generally the less advanced ones, or where there are strict religions which place women as lower or lesser actually create a situation where women and girls are literally trained to believe themselves lesser or less important/less deserving/less able etc.. Things such as where the mother is not allowed out of the home unaccompanied, where men eat first and women only eat what's left etc contribute to making women who have very low expectations. While I am very familiar with BDSM arguably at least some of the submissives tend to be quite damaged or abused people, and conversely so to Dominants. I guess all i am saying is, psychology and human conditioning tend not to be straightforward.. It's a long debate but many of the old beliefs about some of the differences between men and women and what women can and cannot do, have subsequently been disproven. For example the old adage that women are not good at maths.. it's been found that at least some of this is conditioning and social expectations.. It's a fascinating area.. of course that does not preclude that a woman can be top of her field academically but choose to be submissive within a relationship or just sexually.
I understand all that, so im not going to comment on all that Dominance, Submisve, BDSM thing. The point im making is that even though it can be, obedience and misogyny do not have to be linked together. In the same way that an apparent equality does not rule out that he or she would actually be hating the other person's guts. I concede that those are things that need to be discussed before hand and agreed upon. But in my particular case, I am the head of the unit, and although I would probably not be involved in day to day common decisions, in case of something of importance, I will decide which way to go. Given, I will probably do what would make her happy, but even if it didnt, I carry the last saying. And she would have to abide by it. Just like im bound to abide to whatever conditions she puts forth. That doesn't mean I hate her.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at January 21, 2017 11:04 AM MST
Hmm interesting and you make some good points but I would argue that a relationship is entirely different to a job.. I could write reams as to why that is and what the differences are, as well as the expectations. I do not disagree regarding the point that obedience and misogyny are not the same things, as in they don't have to be linked. They often are, but not always.. in BDSM for instance it might well be the female that is dominant and the male submissive. I think there are real dangers implied in a patriarchal society, again too many to deal with here.. but that follows when one person is in the position where he would make a decision that the other would "have to abide by" That tends to just cause resentment and hatred... the thing about patriacal systems is that often the women are NOT happy, they are bored, unfulfilled, resentful and unfortunately this means that there are many men who are unhappy too, not to mention that resentful, bored, unhappy wives do NOT Make very good bed companious :P However in your example you cited that you abide by her *conditions* - that's a partnership, it may be equal, it may have inequalities but both have chosen and created it.. and agree to be bound by it.. equally both are free to walk out, or leave if they choose - so in that respect you are absolutely correct - that's not misogyny
I know I am. Thank you for engaging and taking the time to write. I do understand your point. Consent and mutual respect are paramount, even in a relationship where it is the man being led by a chain. I agree.
Nope. Nobody is happy (or having sex) all the time. For me, a lasting and contented relationship was only possible with someone who became my best friend. Truly being friends was vital to our marriage. Other things were important as well, but I believe our friendship was key.
Benedict Arnold 