Former Community – We Moved
🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.
Why is Submissiveness from a Woman So Desired By Men?
Hello TPM,
I hope you all are well. I have a question, I'd love to hear your responses.
I've noticed not only on here , but online in general, there has been a lot of discussion about the "submissiveness" of a woman and how it is very desired by men.Â
My question is: why is submissiveness from a woman SO desired by men?
And submissiveness in what way is desired by men? (i.e. if your husband tells you have dinner ready for him every night, you obey without hesitation.)
Thank you.
-S.
Hey S.,
These why questions are crucial to understand why things work the way the work -that's how I learned and still learn, asking "deep" questions and not shying away from the silly sounding ones-.
The problem for those who take the task of answering them is that grassroots level explanations tend to be long and complex to properly.
So the easy way out is always that "it's just how (many) men are wired" -and it's still a valid answer fo those who want to focus on results, rather than understanding the "why", which is more often more theoretical-.
There are good articles here already:
- Why men DON'T love bitches, which is a review/teardown of a book that invites women to be higher power to succeed at dating
- Submissive VS strong women, an old article now, but still better than 99% of what you'd find online
A very important note in that article is that there is some subjectivity, and it's not that men prefer the most submissive woman possible, it's enough, and often even preferred, if she's more submissive than they are, or at least that submits to them.
As for almost everything with human behavior, exceptions almost always apply and some men do prefer high power and dominant women. However, if one wants to maximize returns, effectiveness, and the odds of "winning", then you're better off molding to the majority and be strategically (more) submissive to the guy you like.
Hi Lucio,
Thank you for your response. I was just curious because I see the "submissive/submissiveness" word all over the internet when it comes to dating. And for some reason it's like that word is trendy now, what do you think? I wasn't seeing it all over the internet "dating realm" before, I'd say in 2020 is when I started to seeing it on the internet alot.
And also, what are your thoughts on this:
Submissiveness in what ways are desired by men? (i.e. if your husband tells you have dinner ready for him every night, you obey without hesitation.)
Thank you.
-S.
Hey S.,
I think it's a more effective trend compared to the "be high power" that was in vogue until not long ago.
But otherwise, trends and general advice tends to be, well... Generic and lack the nuance that one needs to best apply it in real life.
So my thoughts on the "what ways", the strategies and techniques, are in the articles and lessons (and albeit I don't like mentioning products when I know one is not enrolled in them, that would be Seduction University mostly).
So to avoid re-writing articles/lessons here, as well as to add and find more value rather than re-hashing what's already there, I prefer focusing on precise examples and case studies.
If you have any of those, happy to read and share and learn.
And happy to read if anyone has anything to add on this.
Hello, S.P
Well, I think that we can generally agree that there is a matter of offer and demand going on here that generally tends to balance the market in a position where the men are dominant and the women submissive.
Why demand? Well, women who like men, on average, also tend to demand men that "make them feel safe", that are stronger, that are confident, that are taller, that live "interesting lives" - a vague term to say that he travels, has cool friends, has an important job, hobbies that she may like, is smart, takes her to new places, brings her new experiences.. Which, in more cynical (truer :) ) words, just mean that he has accumulated a lot of social, cultural and economic capital. But if one is stronger than you, richer than you, more confident than you, has more influence than you, and you expect him to provide you a safety that you don't feel in yourself - then, you are at the submissiveness side of the equation.
Take a look, for example, at the kind of erotica that makes a huge success among women: books, films like 50 shades of gray and million others. The sweethearts in these media use to be men that are so high in dominance that they take control of everything even in the bed.
So we might as well flip the question: why is dominance from a man so desirable by a woman?
The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind...
But this describes, as Lucio says, an average. For the times, they are a-changin'...
Tons of exceptions exist.
I can say for myself: I like women that are not submissive. I like to do things together, take decisions together, and I prefer them to be go-getters. But if I make an iron rule out of that, it will be very hard for me to find someone. As much as things are changing, the majority of women are still being socialized to be submissive.
if your husband tells you have dinner ready for him every night, you obey without hesitation.
So, to me, a woman that obeys without hesitation is a huge turnoff. To many men, that's their deepest desire. To the average men, it's something in-between. So it depends on the man.
There is a debate nature Vs nurture when it comes to why it happens. I believe the overall shape why it has been as it has been was caused by nature (men are better equipped to make their words "the last one, otherwise..."). But the most important factor is culture: how society organizes itself (and it can be organized in a way that negates that natural physical advantage men have over women).
Gender relations have changed a lot over the last 2 centuries. And human biology hasn't changed so much in the last few hundreds of thousands of years, while society has also changed a lot in the last two centuries. So, to me, it gives further evidence that it's more nurture than nature, because changes in intersexual relations are much more responsive to changes in society than to biology.
I'm with Lucio here: to maximize the odds of finding a male partner in this world, at the current time, a woman would be better advised to go with the average and be more submissive.
But I'd argue you don't need to. And I'd say that, in this, you would be better served by taking a look at your inner self and listen to your needs, desires and values (not making an enemy out of yourself was one invaluable lesson I learned in PU). And if you are more on the dominant side or would like to be more on this side, there is still plenty of room for you. A lot of men appreciate that, and more and more men are willing to have equal partners. (Just don't tell me to have dinner ready for you every night. I won't obey 😂)
Awesome, awesome post, Kavalier, and really an enlightening way to look at dominance from a wider angle.
Makes more sense like that, and it's much easier to understand as well.
I'd challenge your preference for better understanding:
You don't like super submissive women, fair enough.
But I'd like to see at which point you'd cap her dominance.
For example, image you're dating three exact same women, but:
- Slightly below: One treats you slightly like you're "above her", listens to you more frequently than she challenges you and more frequently goes along with what you say rather than challenging it. When you're in bed and you tell her "go on top", she does it
- Exactly the same: the other one treats you exactly as an equal. When it comes to power, decision making and tasking, you're more like two friends and there is no "leader" in the relationships
- Slightly above: treats you like she's slightly above you. Not abrasive or aggressive, but whenever you two disagree she assumes she's right (that's also part of the larger way of looking at power, and it can be annoying if you're used to getting respect).
When you disagree on what to do, she strongly prefers and insists that you two ought go for what she prefers. Whenever neither of you two knows something she assumes she's right.
And when you're in bed she doesn't move as you tell her, but instead tells you -or at least tries to tell you- when to change position
To me, this is what submissiveness/dominance comes down to when we're talking about most "cool guys".
It's not like they want "miss always says yes": they want a woman with a backbone. But they'd still prefer the one who treats them as the "higher power" party in the relationship.
I'd like to see which one you'd pick, then.
If we put it this way, would you still go for the "exact same"?
Hello, Lucio
As long as we don’t relinquish leadership, we’ll always fall somewhere between 1 and 2.
It’s 1 if our partner is constantly indecisive or prefers that you lead more often, so you are the leader by default.
If she also wants to make decisions, then it becomes a 2. So it’s two leaders (or no true leader, as both are equals). This is my end goal.
There is no way that I’ll accept 3 ever again, not after coming accross TPM :)
The ideal situation is that we both propose plans, we both task one another (but neither one tasks without power protecting and without it being justified), we both express our preferences (even in bed). If both are taking care of the relationship and the needs and wants of each other, then there’s collaboration and we don’t have to think in terms of who is the leader. When we disagree, we negotiate – one compromises, the next time the other one compromises, so the leadership flows from one to the other. If no one can compromise, the relationship has to end.
I did have a relationship that was very close to 2 for a few months, and I credit SU for making it possible (thank you, man!). It ended because we reached this point of no compromise: she had a job opportunity in another continent. I have my own plans in this continent. So she left on a jet plane and doesn’t know when she’ll be back again. But we’ve kept contact and still flirt occasionaly (though we both see other people and know that the possibility of a reunion is remote)
It was close to 2 because we both had things going on in our lives, we worked at the same place (so same income), we both made plans together (and were vocal about our likes and dislikes, but we usually tended to like the same things). Not a real 2 because I’m 5 years her senior. I didn’t choose her especifically because of this, though, she was the one who made the first move. And yeah, reading TPM makes me more power aware, so I ended up in the position of advising her more often (but she also helped me make important decisions in my life too). Also we didn’t live together, so there weren’t many tough decisions to make.
So yeah, after experiencing this, I’m certain that 2 is the way to happiness.
I see, awesome post and story, thank you for sharing, Kavalier!
P.S.:
The descriptions of the "1-2-3" steps in my post may be too strong and one-way to properly describe the concept of "slightly below/above", but you got the point I think.
Thank you Lucio and Kavalier for your responses!
