Female-Led Relationships

[Justplatonic]

Dear Justplatonic

You write: "Would it surprise you to know, the best school-run-friends I have are Women?".

In the small village school, where we girls and boys went to school, we didn't have a school-run, but I totally agree with you. Some of my best friends are in fact women, although most of them are women with whom I grew up when we were children in our own Female Led Community. But I especially remember a girl named Susanne, with whom I very much liked to talk in my early school days. She was quite remarkable, because in those early days the adults in the village forbade their children to connect with us, as our mothers were considered to be "lunatics". But Susanne didn't care. Unfortunately she left school about a year later, when her family moved away.

As I think that I have said in an earlier post, if you are following a course or go to a lecture about religion or spirituality, at least two third of the participants are women. Larissa and me often go to such courses and lectures, because Larissa has inherited strong supernatural and healing powers from her mother Jacinta. (They where greeks who fled after the 1967 military coup in that contry). Therefore Larissa is often asked to organize courses about healing and other spiritual themes, where she of cause always is one of the speakers, due to her many years of experience.

As Ida and me were children, we were always told, that competition is an inevitable trait of the patriarchal society, which our moms resented, because males are born to be competitive. Women on the other hand tend to be compassionate and caring, due to the fact that they in all traditional societies are the main child carers.
Today I think that this explanation perhaps may be a bit exaggerated, but back then I of cause believed in everything that my mom and the other moms in our Female Led Community said.
It was among other things to avoid the "typically male competitiveness", that our feminist mothers always insisted upon, that our community should remain strictly Female Led.
In later life I found out, that women can be quite competitive to. But Larissa and Ida, and my other female friends from my childhood, who still very much adhere to their old matriarchal ideology, insist on saying, that overtly competitive women just have taken over a patriarchal trait to survive in a male dominated society.
I don't know if this explanation is true - our women have an explanation of everything according to our Female Centered world view - but at least I know for sure, that our moms who founded our "little Matriarchy" did their outmost to live up to their ideals of limitless solidarity within their group.

"I understand it's an honor to be friends with intelligent Women...".

Exactly. I couldn't have said it better myself.

I of cause am very proud of my wife Larissa, who is a quite extraordinary woman in many ways. (But all human beings are extraordinary in some way or other, although it may not always be for the good...).
And although I in fact do not consider myself to be a submissive person, it never has bothered me that Larissa always has made all the important decisions in our family. That is because I always, even as a boy, have respected her wisdom and judgement. She has a way to never let me feel inferior in her company, even if she in most ways is vastly superior to me, e.g. with regard to her supernatural powers, but not only that. Even when I was a boy I never felt embarrased or inferior when I was together with Larissa.
As a funny thing I can tell, that when I during our corona shot down read about Female Superiority on the Internet - most of which don't correspond with Larissa's and my own upbringing and experiences - I once showed Larissa a picture of a so called "Domme" in leather boots and a whip in her hand.
Larissa just smiled and remarked, that this woman obviously do not have much authority of her own if she have to threaten or spank her male to have him respect and obey her...

Back in the old days we boys in our community were very proud of our naturally beautiful, mentally strong, strong willed and yet considerate and compassionate sisters and girlfriends. And when we in our teenage years became friends with many of the girls and boys from the neighbouring village, most of those boys were fascinated by our girls to. They even said that most of the girls from their own village were "silly" compared to our girls.
I think that this was due to the fact that our girls worked a lot - as did we boys - and that our mothers from an early age gave their daughters a great deal of responsibility, acting as their mothers substitutes as many of them did - like Ida did - when the adults were absent at work in the day time.
As I have told, the authority given a teenage girl like Ida in the absence of her mother could easily backfire on her, if something went wrong. As it for instance did for Ida shortly before Christmas (Jul in Danish) 1979, as I have told in my previous post. As told, I was really the one to blame, but mother was right in saying, that Ida ought to have gone to the village to get me back, because she knew where I was. If she had done so, I most certainly would have gone home with her, because I of cause respected her authority. But I simply forgot all about time due to the excitement of the game of chess.
After all, something good came out of it, because after moms angry and unjust punishment of Ida I did my best to never let her down again.

I learned that if you don't do your duty, someone other may suffer. And this someone may be a person you care for, as I cared for my dear little sister Ida, and still do.

Hey Tjeik... Another enjoyable read, thanks...

I'd just like to firstly weigh in on the whole Domme in leather boots, and a whip in her hand...

It is an archetype of a Domme to appear that way, certainly more so in the industry. However, I'd agree with Larissa, and you'll find many others would as well. Other contributors have commented about their approach, and it's often down to what works for them on an instinctive level. Some Women have a more cerebral approach, others not so, or a mix.

I will admit though, I do find a Woman dressed that way appealing... Alternatively she could be dressed normally, but masterful in her demeanor. That works for me, as would intelligence, a good sense of humour, kindness, and a personable charm...

Overtly competitive women just have taken over a patriarchal trait to survive in a male dominated society... Definitely, at least from my perspective. My Wife is a product of that, she had to adapt otherwise she would not have the job she has now or before. It's these very traits (and the aforementioned ones) which attracted me to her in the first place...

 

[Tjeik]

Life in a Female Led Community in Denmark

Dear Eroticspank and Wonderer67

"I was amazed that your group started out progressive and became conservative. You mentioned in the bedroom intercourse but not oral sex. And no condoms or birth control used. If it was used it was seldom. Would you say your bedroom activities were also conservative? Is that still true today?".

I will describe our bedroom activities to be rather conservative, although some elements are involved - and to a even greater degree back in the 1970s and 1980s - which might seem very odd to most people today.

First and foremost I have to stress the fact, that among us the women are in complete control of our sexual life. Both regarding to how sexual activities are performed - the woman always sits on top of her lover - and also when and how oft we have intercourse. This is so because it is the male penis who is penetrating the woman's body, and therefore she obviously have to want this to happen. Only if she wants it to happen, sexual intercourse is considered to be a good and beautiful thing to do among us.

You are right to assume, that oral sex is not used among us.
As a teenage boy and a young adult I had never heard of it (you may remember that I have told, that our Feminist mothers strictly had forbidden all kind of pornography to enter our community), but I think that some of the adult women may have heard of oral sex even back then.

But then again, as I have said in another post, the women of our community regarded the creation of new life as something sacred. Motherhood being the one thing that more than anything else singles out the female sex as being the superior sex. The Mother is the center of the family, we all belong to her. A mans role is to support her and her children in the best way he can. So the thinking of our mothers.
I don't know, because we never spoke about it, but the fact that oral sex per definition do not contribute to the creation of new life, made this form of sexual engagement undesirable for our mothers, I think.

I don't write this to offend anyone, who might be fond of oral sex, and who might read this.
I, who grew up in a Female led Community where we in some cases were practicing forms of sexuality, which most other people would consider to be very odd, should be the last person to reject other peoples sexual preferences.

The p pill was very seldom used by our mothers and their daughters who were suspicious of the products of the capitalistic society, as I have told. They also thought, that it was the boy's or the man's responsibility not to make his girlfriend or woman pregnant, unless she wanted to. And as I have told, the mothers taught their daughters how to manipulate the genitals of their boyfriends to prevent them from ejaculating inside her.
The condom was sometimes used, but it was not easy to get, because we could not buy condoms in the nearby village.

In the second half of the 1970s, as the expected great Socialist World Revolution did not happen, our leftist and feminist mothers with increasing intensity began to swap the Marxist ideology for the much more Female Centered Matriarchal world view, as I have told.
As well educated women, they all read a lot about ancient Matriarchies, ancient Goddesses and stuff like that. And they of cause noticed, that in matriarchal societies, of which a few exist even today, the concept of fatherhood do not exist, or do not play any role at all. Because in such a society the lineage is determined in the female line, not in the male line, and who is the mother of a child naturally is never in doubt. Therefore in such a matriarchal society women's sexuality is not controlled by men. And their daughters are the heiresses, because the women are the property owners.

(A key concept of the Matriarchal theory is, that it was women who created the earliest agricultural societies, because in the hunter and gather stone age the men had been the hunters, while the women gathered eatable plants and roots. Some of the women then gradually learned how to cultivate plants, and eventually how to cultivate fields, which they of cause owned, because the fields with the growing crops became their prime working place, so to speak, their men and sons only being their helpers. Fertility of both men, animals and crops was the all overriding concern for women and men in those age old matriarchal societies. And Goddesses, guaranteeing the fertility were the focus of worship. So the theory goes. Shortly told).

In our Female Led Community, the women often had changing lovers, as I have mentioned earlier on. Therefore it really didn't matter whoever was the father of their children. But with the growing fascination of all things Matriarchal in what I call the "fanatical period" of our community, even the word "father" disappeared from daily use among us.
The women and their daughters were used to speak of the men with whom they were sexually engaged as their lovers, but now a new and somewhat degrading word came into use among the girls and their mothers of our little Matriarchy.
A male with whom a woman intended to form a relationship in order to have children with him was now called "hendes befrugter". (It simply means a man whose task it is to make a woman pregnant. Perhaps you might say "her begetter" in English).
Even Larissa used this word. I had already been her boyfriend for a pretty long time, and we of cause had had a long standing sexual relation when she one day in early june 1982 told me, that "jeg har valgt dig til at være min befrugter, Tjeik" (I have chosen you to be my begetter, Tjeik).
Of cause I had the right to say no to her proposal - there was no compulsion in our Female Led Community whatsoever - but the clearly visible bulge that her words caused my penis to form in my briefs was a sufficient answer, as Larissa noticed with a smile. And so it was.

If the above told cannot be said to be conservative in the common sense of the word, what we might call the wedding ceremony certainly was even less.

Perhaps I first should underline the fact, that it is quite normal for small communities, who are formed in opposition to the greater society to abandon the symbols and rituals of that society, and instead form their own symbols and rituals according to their own ideals. Because human beings simply need symbols and rituals. Something to relate to, which is bigger than ourselves.
For instance the Free Town of Christiania in Copenhagen has is own flag and its own rules and its own special kind of local government.
May be this fact can help you to better understand, or at least accept, the rather odd wedding ritual that was performed for Larissa and me on the day of the Summer Solstice (Sankt Hans Aften in Danish) 1982, when I was just twenty year old, and Larissa was nineteen year old.

That our wedding ceremony took place on that day, was no coincident.

Because Summer Solstice, Winter Solstice and Spring Equinox and Autumn Equinox were considered to have been important dates in the calender of the old agricultural Matriarchal societies.
Because the choosing of a male partner (or "befrugter", "begetter" as our women said back then) was considered to be a matter which only concerned the young woman herself and her female relatives and friends - plus of cause the chosen male - besides me only women were present in Larissa's mother Jacinta's house, where the ceremony took place in the bedroom, which Larissa and me should share.
Larissa's mother Jacinta and Larissa's one year younger sister Ophelia were present, and so of cause were my mother and my little sister Ida, who was 17 year old at the time and therefore considered to be a young and mature woman. Also Ida's best friend Louise was invited, and Louise's mother Karen was also present. And of cause Larissa's best girlfriends Clara, Mette and Sonja were also invited.
The about forty year old woman Monika, who was a kind of chief Matriarchal ideologist - you may perhaps call her a kind of Priestess - in our community, performed the ritual.

First she asked Larissa if she would "elske Tjeik og modtage ham i dit hus og under dit tag" (love Tjeik and receive him in your house and under your roof), to which Larissa said yes.
Then Monika asked me if I would "elske, tjene og adlyde Larissa" (love, serve and obey Larissa) to which I of cause also answered yes.
These questions may seem strange, but the meaning of the words were only a description of our every day life:
That I should "serve" Larissa only meant, that I should do my chores in our daily routines, as Larissa would do hers. And "obey" only meant that I recognized Larissa's right to make the decisions. So I entered into much the same kind of relation to Larissa as that I was used to in regard to my mother and my sister.
And strictly speaking did the house not belong to Larissa. It of cause belonged to Jacinta, her mother. But all the same the wordings of the wedding ritual were as described.

The strangest part of our wedding ritual was what followed thereafter. Larissa and me were expected to consume our wedding by having intercourse at once, and the invited women were to look on.
Normally of cause sexual intercourse was a strictly private activity, also among us. But the wedding was seen as a kind of almost holy Fertility Ritual, and the women thought that it was a good omen when the bride became pregnant and bore a child nine months after her wedding intercourse.
I only had to pull of my brief and lay down in the bed, and I of cause immediately had a full erection. I have told how intercourse was among us, but this time Larissa of cause let me ejaculate inside her. And as I so did, she screamed with joy and delight. And so did all the women onlookers.

Nine months later she actually bore our first child, a lovely boy, whom Larissa named Alex.

Two years later we even had the sweetest twin daughters, which was a great blessing, because twins are very seldom born. Larissa decided to name them Ariadne and Andromeda, because being of Greek origin she preferred Greek names.

For the next nearly four years Larissa took great care, not to become pregnant again, and she certainly knew how to avoid it. Because there naturally was a lot of work and expenses which went with having twin daughters. But of cause I was not in chastity, as Larissa always masturbated me to have an ejaculation after she felt satisfied when we had sexual intercourse.

About four years after our lovely twin daughters Ariadne and Andromeda were born, we had our last child. A little boy, whom Larissa named Jason. As he grow up, he became a kind of pet child for his twin sisters.

Now, are all of the here described sexual activities conservative bedroom activities?

In some ways perhaps, but certainly not in all ways, I should think...

 

[littlecordelera]

I once showed Larissa a picture of a so called "Domme" in leather boots and a whip in her hand. Larissa just smiled and remarked, that this woman obviously does not have much authority of her own if she have to threaten or spank her male to have him respect and obey her...

Tjeik, in this particular instance, I assume you are referring to the act of spanking as the indicator of the woman's lack of authority. I say this because in an earlier post you stated that "the scolding of a boy was always followed up with one or two slaps to his face." So it seems that in your female-led community the act of striking a boy is not an indicator of a woman's lack of authority, but spanking is. Is this correct?

It seems this is a difference in culture. I would never slap Jason in the face. Here in the United States that would be a clear and intentional sign of disrespect. Over here, a slap to the face would be considered reactionary while a spanking is not, simply because a spanking requires some amount of preparation, whereas a slap is immediate.

 

[Justplatonic]

It seems this is a difference in culture. I would never slap Jason in the face. Here in the United States that would be a clear and intentional sign of disrespect. Over here, a slap to the face would be considered reactionary while a spanking is not, simply because a spanking requires some amount of preparation, whereas a slap is immediate.

Good point littlecordelera... Same over here... Luckily, I haven't been slapped in the face (I hope I haven't tempted fate)... I've been around for a while, so I've made some unintentional mistakes... A heated discussion/argument (if needed to resolve the issue) is normally more than enough in most cases...

 

[eroticspank]

Dear Eroticspank and Wonderer67

"I was amazed that your group started out progressive and became conservative. You mentioned in the bedroom intercourse but not oral sex. And no condoms or birth control used. If it was used it was seldom. Would you say your bedroom activities were also conservative? Is that still true today?".

Now, are all of the here described sexual activities conservative bedroom activities?

In some ways perhaps, but certainly, not in all ways, I should think...

I can't thank you enough Tjeik for the look into your world you have provided for all of us.

I guess I would say the short answer to your question above is yes. Conservative.

Let me explain. First, I would say that I am talking about a conservative outlook in your own community. Just intercourse and no other activities are mainly because of how you feel as a group about society and their choices. This includes nonbelief in birth control, condoms, etc. At the same time, you know about other practices like oral sex, toys, BDSM, they are just things you choose not to do. Still, you are very understanding and accepting of others that do. It is just not for you. I still see this as a conservative view. BUT I do not see that as a bad thing. I think it is great.

As far as sexual activities with the woman on top controlling the intercourse until she is satisfied, and then attends to her partner, my thoughts are that is not the norm. However, you grew up in a society where that is the norm, and you continuing that is conservative not venturing out from your norm.

I find it ironic that I recently wrote an erotic story about 6 months ago that I plan to post here on Lit about a woman I met by chance that did basically that to me. (Woman on top intercourse, then attends to me) She was from Europe somewhere and had an accent, maybe she was from a group like yours. So IF she was from your group or one like it and I followed her back to the group, I would love the bedroom time but it would be a lifestyle change. It is not just about bedroom sex led by the woman, there is a lifestyle change involved that is not just weekends. This is a commitment to a new way of thinking and doing things. (New for me at least.) I call that conservative but maybe that is the wrong term.

Whatever you call it, it is not a bad thing at all, just not for me. Just like oral sex for you guys, not bad or are the people that do it, just something you choose not to do.

ES

 

[Tjeik]

Life in a Female Led Community in Denmark

Dear Littlecordelera and Justplatonic

"Tjeik, in this particular instance, I assume you are referring to the act of spanking as the indicator of the woman's lack of authority. I say this because in an earlier post you stated that "the scolding of a boy was always followed up with one or two slaps to his face." So it seems that in your female-led community the act of striking a boy is not an indicator of a woman's lack of authority, but spanking is. Is this correct?

It seems this is a difference in culture. I would never slap Jason in the face. Here in the United States that would be a clear and intentional sign of disrespect. Over here, a slap to the face would be considered reactionary while a spanking is not, simply because a spanking requires some amount of preparation, whereas a slap is immediate."

Littlecordelera, you are right.
There certainly is a difference in culture between the USA and Denmark and the other Nordic countries, in this and in other respects.
I didn't even know, that spanking of children as a form of punishment is still in use in the USA.

But as my wife Larissa says, there is a crucial difference between the interpersonal bond, given by nature, not by human choice, between a mother and her daughters and sons, and between sister and brother on the one hand, and the bond between a wife and her husband on the other. The marital bond we enter into of our own free will, and we beforehand know the conditions, according to the rules of the community we live in. As they for instance were said out by Monika to Larissa and me at our wedding ceremony.

Among us we think, that there ought to be no compulsion, or physical threats or violence, involved in the loving partnership between woman and man. I am expected to obey Larissa, not because I fear her, but because I love and respect her and her natural born Female authority. And this I do, because I as a boy have been taught to respect women. First by my mother, and later on also by my dear little sister Ida, as I have told. They both on rare occasions, when I really deserved it, scolded me and slapped me in my face. But I still don't think that this was unjust or a sign of disrespect towards me or a sign of lack of Female authority on their part.

Children are more or less immature human beings, who have to be raised by the adults to respect the rules of the community that they are born into. To correct, scold, reprimand and punish children who transgress the rules of society or of their family is common practice overall in the world. I of cause know, that all of this is a banal truth.

I think that our mothers tried to punish their daughters and sons in a way they could understand. so to speak. And my wife Larissa, who have used the same punishing methods (although she seldom had to face slap our boys) confirms that.

When we boys in our small community quarreled - which we of cause sometimes did - we used to fight it out. We reacted physically. And as I have told, we could be quite belligerent when our friends from the nearby village or even worse our girls were moped or attacked by other young boys.
But when the fight was over, it was over. There seldom were bad feelings between us afterwards.

But when the girls quarreled among themselves, they never used physical force. They used the force of their words instead. They would form a clique, which by the use of slander excluded the girl or the girls, whom the clique members wished to punish.
It had a much graver effect for the girl victims, than the occasional fights between us boys had for us.
This has nothing to do with the Female Led character of our community, because so most boys and girls react everywhere, I think.

So our moms and teenage sisters punished us boys by use of force, if need be. Because we boys tended to be more unruly and immature than our sisters, and because this was the way we ourselves reacted when we were angry at someone. It was a language we boys could understand, so to speak.

Our sisters were punished by our moms with stern and shaming words, because it had the desired effect upon them.
I clearly remember how sorry Ida used to be long after, if mom had been angry with her and reprimanded her for something. I got a scolding and a slap to my face, and then it was over with. I didn't feel sorry for hours thereafter.

Of cause I do not want to say, that this is a better way to raise children than your method is, whatever it may be. I only say, that so it was and still is among us.

It is however my conviction, that boys need to learn to respect girls and women from early on, because this respect is not inborn in young boys.
The many appalling revelations of men's abuse of women in the wake of the Me To Movement bear witness to this.

You may find it unjust that I on rare occasions were face slapped by my mother, and later on even by my dear little sister, as mom had delegated the Female authority to Ida when mom was absent.
But so it was in all households of our Female led Community, and none - and I repeat NONE - of us boys raised in our community have ever as grown up men been disrespectful to women, and of cause we certainly have never tried to abuse them.
NOT because we are any better than other people - because this we are not - but because our moms and sisters taught us, that the most shameful thing a boy or a man can do is to use his greater physical strength to force himself upon a woman. It is degrading for her. But utterly shameful and disgraceful for him.

So I think that something good came out of our Female led upbringing after all. Odd as it all might sound.

 

[Justplatonic]

Dear Littlecordelera and Justplatonic

"Tjeik, in this particular instance, I assume you are referring to the act of spanking as the indicator of the woman's lack of authority. I say this because in an earlier post you stated that "the scolding of a boy was always followed up with one or two slaps to his face." So it seems that in your female-led community the act of striking a boy is not an indicator of a woman's lack of authority, but spanking is. Is this correct?

It seems this is a difference in culture. I would never slap Jason in the face. Here in the United States that would be a clear and intentional sign of disrespect. Over here, a slap to the face would be considered reactionary while a spanking is not, simply because a spanking requires some amount of preparation, whereas a slap is immediate."

Littlecordelera, you are right.
There certainly is a difference in culture between the USA and Denmark and the other Nordic countries, in this and in other respects.
I didn't even know, that spanking of children as a form of punishment is still in use in the USA.

But as my wife Larissa says, there is a crucial difference between the interpersonal bond, given by nature, not by human choice, between a mother and her daughters and sons, and between sister and brother on the one hand, and the bond between a wife and her husband on the other. The marital bond we enter into of our own free will, and we beforehand know the conditions, according to the rules of the community we live in. As they for instance were said out by Monika to Larissa and me at our wedding ceremony.

Among us we think, that there ought to be no compulsion, or physical threats or violence, involved in the loving partnership between woman and man. I am expected to obey Larissa, not because I fear her, but because I love and respect her and her natural born Female authority. And this I do, because I as a boy have been taught to respect women. First by my mother, and later on also by my dear little sister Ida, as I have told. They both on rare occasions, when I really deserved it, scolded me and slapped me in my face. But I still don't think that this was unjust or a sign of disrespect towards me or a sign of lack of Female authority on their part.

Children are more or less immature human beings, who have to be raised by the adults to respect the rules of the community that they are born into. To correct, scold, reprimand and punish children who transgress the rules of society or of their family is common practice overall in the world. I of cause know, that all of this is a banal truth.

I think that our mothers tried to punish their daughters and sons in a way they could understand. so to speak. And my wife Larissa, who have used the same punishing methods (although she seldom had to face slap our boys) confirms that.

When we boys in our small community quarreled - which we of cause sometimes did - we used to fight it out. We reacted physically. And as I have told, we could be quite belligerent when our friends from the nearby village or even worse our girls were moped or attacked by other young boys.
But when the fight was over, it was over. There seldom were bad feelings between us afterwards.

But when the girls quarreled among themselves, they never used physical force. They used the force of their words instead. They would form a clique, which by the use of slander excluded the girl or the girls, whom the clique members wished to punish.
It had a much graver effect for the girl victims, than the occasional fights between us boys had for us.
This has nothing to do with the Female Led character of our community, because so most boys and girls react everywhere, I think.

So our moms and teenage sisters punished us boys by use of force, if need be. Because we boys tended to be more unruly and immature than our sisters, and because this was the way we ourselves reacted when we were angry at someone. It was a language we boys could understand, so to speak.

Our sisters were punished by our moms with stern and shaming words, because it had the desired effect upon them.
I clearly remember how sorry Ida used to be long after, if mom had been angry with her and reprimanded her for something. I got a scolding and a slap to my face, and then it was over with. I didn't feel sorry for hours thereafter.

Of cause I do not want to say, that this is a better way to raise children than your method is, whatever it may be. I only say, that so it was and still is among us.

It is however my conviction, that boys need to learn to respect girls and women from early on, because this respect is not inborn in young boys.
The many appalling revelations of men's abuse of women in the wake of the Me To Movement bear witness to this.

You may find it unjust that I on rare occasions were face slapped by my mother, and later on even by my dear little sister, as mom had delegated the Female authority to Ida when mom was absent.
But so it was in all households of our Female led Community, and none - and I repeat NONE - of us boys raised in our community have ever as grown up men been disrespectful to women, and of cause we certainly have never tried to abuse them.
NOT because we are any better than other people - because this we are not - but because our moms and sisters taught us, that the most shameful thing a boy or a man can do is to use his greater physical strength to force himself upon a woman. It is degrading for her. But utterly shameful and disgraceful for him.

So I think that something good came out of our Female led upbringing after all. Odd as it all might sound.

Tjeik... Thanks again for posting... Nothing you've posted sounds odd at all IMHO... Just different in places... And of course, variety is the spice of life...

If your former community was a holiday destination, I would gladly book a month or more to stay... It'd be great to work the land, earn my keep, and be in the company of leading Women... Bliss...

 

[irishblade]

Tjeik... Thanks again for posting... Nothing you've posted sounds odd at all IMHO... Just different in places... And of course, variety is the spice of life...

If your former community was a holiday destination, I would gladly book a month or more to stay... It'd be great to work the land, earn my keep, and be in the company of leading Women... Bliss...

^^^ Agreed

 

[Justplatonic]

^^^ Agreed

Thanks irishblade... With two of us interested, may be the holiday companies may take notice...

 

[littlecordelera]

Among us we think, that there ought to be no compulsion, or physical threats or violence, involved in the loving partnership between woman and man. I am expected to obey Larissa, not because I fear her, but because I love and respect her and her natural born Female authority

I would hope Jason would obey me because he respects me and my authority and all that wonderful stuff, but if he doesn't, fear works. I guess the way I see it, the ends justifies the means, so I always make sure there is a tangible undercurrent of fear coursing through his cuckold veins.

Come to think of it, he's probably due for a "touch up." I wouldn't want him to forget or anything.

 

[Justplatonic]

Among us we think, that there ought to be no compulsion, or physical threats or violence, involved in the loving partnership between woman and man. I am expected to obey Larissa, not because I fear her, but because I love and respect her and her natural born Female authority

I would hope Jason would obey me because he respects me and my authority and all that wonderful stuff, but if he doesn't, fear works. I guess the way I see it, the ends justifies the means, so I always make sure there is a tangible undercurrent of fear coursing through his cuckold veins.

Come to think of it, he's probably due for a "touch up." I wouldn't want him to forget or anything.

I'm well aware of my Wife's authority on a daily basis, and perhaps that's the real point of difference here i.e. how the recipient/subservient responds to their Female Leader... That surely has a direct correlation on the Female Leader's style or approach?...

 

[policywank]

I'm well aware of my Wife's authority on a daily basis, and perhaps that's the real point of difference here i.e. how the recipient/subservient responds to their Female Leader... That surely has a direct correlation on the Female Leader's style or approach?...

I think that every leader has their own style or approach. But the good ones tailor their approach to those that they are leading with a focus on achieving whatever objectives they have set out for themselves and those that they lead.

My husband wants to be obedient and rarely needs discipline. Sometimes I "discipline" him as part of a larger Ds dynamic - but that is either a form of kinky play or a rare reminder of our relative status when I think it serves a legitimate purpose.

If he falls into line easily and readily but I choose to get aggressive when it clearly isn't needed that isn't good leadership in my opinion. It is an indulgence for my own gratification. That is acceptable because responsibility comes with the right to certain indulgences. But it shouldn't be confused with a necessary or desirable aspect of leadership.

And it should be understood that authority and leadership are not the same thing. If a person in a position of authority uses it solely or primarily for her own self-indulgence with little or no regard for those over whom she exercises authority then she is not really a leader at all (or at least not a good one).

 

[Justplatonic]

I think that every leader has their own style or approach. But the good ones tailor their approach to those that they are leading with a focus on achieving whatever objectives they have set out for themselves and those that they lead.

My husband wants to be obedient and rarely needs discipline. Sometimes I "discipline" him as part of a larger Ds dynamic - but that is either a form of kinky play or a rare reminder of our relative status when I think it serves a legitimate purpose.

If he falls into line easily and readily but I choose to get aggressive when it clearly isn't needed that isn't good leadership in my opinion. It is an indulgence for my own gratification. That is acceptable because responsibility comes with the right to certain indulgences. But it shouldn't be confused with a necessary or desirable aspect of leadership.

And it should be understood that authority and leadership are not the same thing. If a person in a position of authority uses it solely or primarily for her own self-indulgence with little or no regard for those over whom she exercises authority then she is not really a leader at all (or at least not a good one).

Thank you policywank... As always, sage words... I guess a Female leader doesn't need to lead that much at all, if their authority is respected... That's kinda what Tjeik has said all along, and I'm on the same page with my Wife...

And does explain why other Female leaders need to take a more disciplined approach when their authority is not respected... Does that make sense Tjeik? Even though the means are different, the methodology is the same...

 

[policywank]

Thank you policywank... As always, sage words... I guess a Female leader doesn't need to lead that much at all, if their authority is respected... That's kinda what Tjeik has said all along, and I'm on the same page with my Wife...

And does explain why other Female leaders need to take a more disciplined approach when their authority is not respected... Does that make sense Tjeik? Even though the means are different, the methodology is the same...

I might put it slightly differently. In my opinion, there isn't a point at which she "doesn't need to lead that much" but rather a point at which her leadership becomes focussed more on where she is leading rather than if and how she convinces others to follow. It may appear smoother and more seamless because the friction is reduced but the essential part of leadership comes after you have the loyalty and commitment of your followers.

 

[whenagain]

I might put it slightly differently. In my opinion, there isn't a point at which she "doesn't need to lead that much" but rather a point at which her leadership becomes focussed more on where she is leading rather than if and how she convinces others to follow. It may appear smoother and more seamless because the friction is reduced but the essential part of leadership comes after you have the loyalty and commitment of your followers.

Very well stated.

 

[Justplatonic]

I might put it slightly differently. In my opinion, there isn't a point at which she "doesn't need to lead that much" but rather a point at which her leadership becomes focussed more on where she is leading rather than if and how she convinces others to follow. It may appear smoother and more seamless because the friction is reduced but the essential part of leadership comes after you have the loyalty and commitment of your followers.

Thank you for the clarification policywank... You clearly speak from experience, and I truly respect that...

 

[irishblade]

I would hope Jason would obey me because he respects me and my authority and all that wonderful stuff, but if he doesn't, fear works. I guess the way I see it, the ends justifies the means, so I always make sure there is a tangible undercurrent of fear coursing through his cuckold veins.

Come to think of it, he's probably due for a "touch up." I wouldn't want him to forget or anything.

He should (and I believe does). What about men who you aren’t with? In the grocery store, at the mall, online, etc. I’ve interacted with you for years on here and through your blog and I feel like I would submit to your authority out of respect and reverence. Just curious if you find that with non-sexual men in your life?

 

[littlecordelera]

He should (and I believe does). What about men who you aren’t with? In the grocery store, at the mall, online, etc. I’ve interacted with you for years on here and through your blog and I feel like I would submit to your authority out of respect and reverence. Just curious if you find that with non-sexual men in your life?

To be honest, and I don't mean to sound flippant, I really don't care. I just want things my way. I do believe that women, as a collective group, generally make better life decisions than males, but I know that is not always the case.

Jason says that people find me "intimidating," and some have said that I have a dominant personality. If those descriptions are true, it is not because of a conscious effort on my part. It's just who I am. But those descriptors do not sound like respect and reverence. They sound like fear. For the most part, I don't care, but when people fear me, it gives me power over them. And when I have power over people, it allows me to get things done that are in our mutual interest. Some people use power for their own selfish gains, with no regard to others, but I can honestly say that I never do that. I treat everyone with respect.

In my opinion, the one who is obligated to show respect is the one in power, not the one who submits.

 

[sissyboycindy]

My girlfriends solution

Not all of us are Dommes, though.

. My girlfriend isnt dominant either,,she has tried but you can not be something if it isnt in you . Her solution was to find a man that was interested in dominating a womans sissy boyfriend . When she told me that she had a new boyfriend and that he was dominant I got excited thinking how fun it was going to be to watch her living as her new mans slave . I really got excited when she told me to put on one of my french maids outfits,I couldnt wait to meet this man,I liked him already because he wanted me to feel cumfy so he wanted me to dress fem for him .WOW was I wrong.I answered the door as my girlfriends sissy maid and when Victor got there he forced me to be both their sissy maid . That man took total control of me and forced me to live as their full time sissy maid . If I wasnt doing housework they had me waiting on them hand and foot .The only time Iwas given a break from being their sissy maid was when they invited a dominant male friend to come over so he could take over my training and abuse

 

[littlecordelera]

I treat everyone with respect.

And you are probably wondering, "How can you treat Jason with respect when you know that spanking him humiliates him?"

Jason is a cuckold, through and through. It's what he wants. It's what we both want.

 

[irishblade]

And you are probably wondering, "How can you treat Jason with respect when you know that spanking him humiliates him?"

Jason is a cuckold, through and through. It's what he wants. It's what we both want.

Undoubtedly so. He calls you intimidating so does that show up when you meet strangers? Do they clearly acknowledge (by actions I would assume) that you are the alpha in the room?

 

[TwoHeadsBald]

Female lead relationship

Even though I am a dominant male. I believe that women control the relationship when it comes to sex especially.

 

[littlecordelera]

Undoubtedly so. He calls you intimidating so does that show up when you meet strangers? Do they clearly acknowledge (by actions I would assume) that you are the alpha in the room?

Irish, I've never paid that much attention. Maybe I should!

I know that when I meet new guys in the dating scene most of them are terribly nervous, and some of them become more nervous as the date progresses. Is that because I am "intimidating"?

 

[Justplatonic]

I know that when I meet new guys in the dating scene most of them are terribly nervous, and some of them become more nervous as the date progresses. Is that because I am "intimidating"?

My friend's Wife suffers no fools... She can size up a person from 100 yards, know what he/she is going to say and be like, before they can blink. If what I've already stated hasn't made it obvious, she is supremely intelligent.

I've never been intimidated by her, as I have nothing to hide, or pretend to be someone I'm not. I admire her, and admittedly, she is very alluring to me. But my friends are vanilla, so its stays platonic between us...

So to answer your question littlecordelera... From my point of view, I admire you, and admittedly find you very alluring... intimidating doesn't even factor into the equation IMHO...

 

[littlecordelera]

My friend's Wife suffers no fools... She can size up a person from 100 yards, know what he/she is going to say and be like, before they can blink. If what I've already stated hasn't made it obvious, she is supremely intelligent.

I've never been intimidated by her, as I have nothing to hide, or pretend to be someone I'm not. I admire her, and admittedly, she is very alluring to me. But my friends are vanilla, so its stays platonic between us...

So to answer your question littlecordelera... From my point of view, I admire you, and admittedly find you very alluring... intimidating doesn't even factor into the equation IMHO...

Wow! Thank you, justplatonic!

It is difficult to answer some questions honestly out here. To do so would sound self-promoting, and I am not that way, or at least, I try not to be. For those questions, if they had been asked in a PM, my answer would have been completely different. I sometimes wonder if you guys can tell that I am dodging the question. Whatever the case, you are always welcome to send me a PM.

Justplatonic, guys like you are a breath of fresh air. I can't tell you how many times I have met a guy who is pretending to be something he is not. And yes, I can tell. It happens in PM's and email, too. So to be honest, I know why guys become so nervous. They want to impress me, of course they do. That's the way nature made it. The male has to impress the female. For some that nervousness is natural, and that's okay, I like that! But for others, they are nervous because instead of being themselves, they are pretending to be something they are not, and they are afraid I can tell.

I can tell, and I don't like it.

What impresses me is a guy who has the courage to be himself. It may not get him anywhere; he may not be what I am looking for, but the chances of fooling me are extremely slim, and the outcome is usually not pretty. When I meet that guy who can be himself - whatever that may be - and we click, I can take it from there, and you can bet I will. He doesn't have to be the alpha, very few truly are, he just has to be himself. I can play in different ways, and I am not afraid of sex. If we click, this experienced female who likes to call the shots, can show you a world the likes of which you've never seen. There is nothing I enjoy more.

That's the honest truth.