Heterosexuality

[thumper]

This excerpt is a bit long and requires some upper level reading skills, but I think this guy is onto something :

By Henry Makow Ph.D.

Women want to be possessed by a man's love. God's love of Creation is mirrored in a man's love of a woman. A girlfriend once told me, "I want to be used." In a way, a man channels God's love to a woman by making her a wife and (possibly) a mother. Women want masculine power, but it must be in a man. The same girlfriend also said that without a man, she feels "like a rudderless boat." Similarly, a man without a woman is a rudder without a boat.

A man cannot love a woman who is competing with him for power. Relationships between so-called "equals" are like mergers, or roommates. One psychiatrist, Irene Claremont de Castillejo, calls them "brother-sister" marriages (Knowing Women: A Feminine Psychology, 1973). They cannot achieve the intimacy as when a woman surrenders her will to a man, and a man returns this trust with his wholehearted love. Some psychiatrists say her sexual satisfaction is also linked to her ability to trust and surrender.

Feminine women are creatures of God. In love, they sacrifice their "selves" for love, which in many religions is the key to transcendence. Helen Deutsch remarked on this masochist-narcissist syndrome in her The Psychology of Women: A Psychoanalytic Interpretation (1944). The majority of women only achieve fulfillment as wives and mothers. In their hearts, they know it.

Nor can women love men with whom they compete. Women are hypergamous which means they seek men of higher status than themselves. Even the most ardent heterosexual feminist only can love someone more powerful than she.

The struggle for power is poisoning male-female relations. It is the death of love. Men cannot give up their defining characteristic and expect to be men. Women cannot criticize and challenge men and expect to have satisfying relationships. When I comprehended this, I felt liberated. I established a healthy relationship with a woman who is my female complement, and married her.

In conclusion, the universal complaint is that men no longer know how to be men; women don't know how to be women. It helps to see heterosexual love as a mystical dance. In a dance, the male leads, the female follows. You canit have a graceful dance without each partner playing his part.

The dance is based on love. The male is always considering his mate's wishes, because he loves her. In some cases, he will ask her to lead. As in a ballroom dance, who can say which role is more important. Both partners are of equal value. The dance requires both the leadership and dynamism of the male; and the beauty, love and grace of the female. In the dance of love, two people become one, and the fruit of this mystical union, is often a child.

Discuss.

[igofast]

Originally Posted by thumper

requires some upper level reading skills

That's pretty easy reading if you ask me.

Anyway, I think that works for a lot of people, but not everyone. Human beings aren't really one-size-fits-all when it comes to relationships.

[Dreamscapist]

From my perspective as a dominant man, most of that easily makes sense, and seems quite natural...even having Biblical support. But I would not say that any one power arrangement is more valid than another, or ultimately more successful, and I certainly wouldn't state that heterosexuality in general has but one correct power definition. Children imprint on and usually seek to replicate the power dynamics displayed and defined by their parents, and such have varied among couples for ages. There are men who are more comfortable with a controlling wife who "keeps them in line", just as there are many couples who find an equal partnership to be the only tolerable and happy form of relationship....and there are innumerous degrees in between. Personally, I am not interested in controlling every aspect of my partner's life (how boring that would be), but there are indeed couples where such a total power exchange is exactly what they both want and need. A successful relationship is whatever the two (or more) people involved construct it to be.

[Zoot]

Thumper, it may not be true for everyone, but it's exactly true for me and every woman I've ever met.

[twinkles]

I was taught to be submissive. My parents fought a lot when I was a kid so I avoid confrontantions with my bf. However, I think I like to dominate. I build things up inside - relationship - but they all sooner or later explode.

The thing is, in my opinion, women were taught/educated to be, to act in a certain way when in a relationship. the domination/submission game. But it's not working out that well.Reality changed a lot. Personally, all I need to do is fight the deamon in my head that makes me cling onto relationships.

On one side, reality in terms of career oportunities have changed a lot for women, but when it comes to facing the world alone... we're still pretty much in the 60's. I've changed countries and I don't see a difference at all. It's like we made the difference happen outside, now all we have left is believing in it. Don't think that shall happen too soon.