"Surrendering" to your femininity... Have you done this/ do you do this?

[MoreSacredDance]

Name change because this could be a bit "outing" put together with some other posts of mine.

My husband and I are currently going through the toughest period of our marriage. I am hopeful and positive though, because we both love each other very much and want to stay together.

In short, he feels emasculated and this has filtered into lots of different parts of our relationship, including a much reduced sex life. I accept that my behaviour have led to or worsened this. My job means I have to be strong, confident and in control. I have probably attempted to use a lot of the "tools" I employ to succeed at work within our marriage, and that has NOT worked well. I see that now.

I watched John Wineland's "What Men Crave" ten minute talk and it was like a lightbulb moment. My husband has actually told me all these things, just in different ways that I didn't take time to listen to and understand.

I don't think it's a bad thing for a husband to want to lead or feel like a hero or all those other cheesy things. Especially if that is what he feels is missing in his marriage. I think it IS possible for me to surrender to my femininity while still being strong, assured and confident. Submission and surrender are different in my eyes now. Deep down, I actually do want to surrender at times as I am exhausted from constantly fighting to control every little thing.

But how do I do this? Has anyone else recognised this and actively made this change? I'm not even sure where to start in a practical sense.

Does he by any chance have a tiny tiny penis?
Or does he just act like one?

Any relationship between adults - marriage, house sharing, living with grown offspring, business partnership - calls for co-operation, negotiation and compromise. Two adults who have grown up separately are unlikely to be on the same page all the time about everything. This is where you decide between you who takes the lead on what, and how to resolve the conflict when you really can't agree. It should never be a case of one partner riding rough-shod over the other. You take their feelings into consideration and expect them to do the same for you. You support each other as and when needed. Giving in to make your partner happy should be something you both enjoy doing at different times, as a demonstration of your love for each other. Basically it's gotta be mutual.

I sometimes think same sex couples must find this aspect of relationships easier, because the "male/female role" societal stereotypes aren't there to get in the way of true partnership. But then, humans being the contrary creatures they are, there's always something to disagree about

It is quite an old fashioned perspective, and perhaps would sort the problem out, but I think it's the wrong way of looking at it. You don't have to surrender to your femininity, or let him be the man. You just need to be more sensitive to your partner's needs. You have got into the habit of being controlling, which is easy for women both as mothers and as a knee jerk response to having to stand up to men constantly, though it is more often seen as a masculine dominant role.

When I started teaching, I came over all authoritative at home which wasn't very nice for DH. I didn't surrender to my feminine side, I just stopped treating him like a naughty child.

Build on respect and intimacy. Tune in to his needs, and stop making the running. See what happens. You can still wear trousers.

BertrandRussell:

Actually, no, that was the precise moment I hit the off button.

Bleugh.

I think what Anniegetyourgun says is right re co-operation, negotiation and compromise. But here, what struck me was OP saying that sex was reduced because he felt emasculated. To me, it seems like he's looking for something to blame for the lack of sex.

Surely, if it were a case of OP being too controlling, he'd say - eg when you booked our weekend away without discussing it with me, or berated me for buying the wrong bread, or turned over the channel when I was watching tv - you were riding roughshod over my needs. That's not what comes over at all in the OP. It's more like nothing she does is right, and she's bound to fail.

I doubt the OP will come back, but maybe she should start a thread about the state of the whole relationship. Perhaps they are just not suited.

The wording and attitudes on this thread are what makes so many people turn their back on the term feminism. Everything becomes a feminist issue at the cost of seeing things can be simply due to lacking understanding about what it takes to be a good partner.

Either gender needs to feel listened to, considered and appreciated. This is nothing to do with emasculation or surrendering and is instead about learning how to be a good partner and operating together as a team which can be hard to do if you are a confident and competent individual regardless of gender. Why try to turn it into a feminist issue when it is not?

Joysmum:

Of course it is. Why should feeling powerless be linked to castration? Why should having no penis equate to being weaker? It is the association of ideas here that makes it a feminist issue.

Well the OP has stated that she has brought her management tools from work into their marriage. The femininity and emasculation terminology may be based in old fashioned relationship dynamics but the information given by the OP is clear and certainly implies a situation where the OP is clear.

So how come many of the women on here are telling her to ditch him and find a man who accepts strong women which in this situation is saying to find a man who accepts being treated as a member of staff?

*Where the OP is controlling not clear

HarmlessChap:

Oh I am not saying ditch him. It's not obvious whether he buys into this heavily gendered thinking or not.

I can never get That 10 minutes of my life back op! knew I shouldn't have googled

So how come many of the women on here are telling her to ditch him and find a man who accepts strong women which in this situation is saying to find a man who accepts being treated as a member of staff?

No it isn't. Its saying that IF the husband is using terms like "emasculated" and saying their sex life is suffering because OP is not "feminine" and "surrendering" enough, then she should ditch him and find a man whose sense of masculinity isn't threatened by a strong woman. I would ditch a man like that because I wouldn't be able to play the role of subservient little woman, so there would be no future for the relationship.
Maybe this idea has come from OP and the husband might have said nothing of the sort, in which case she needs to find more reasonable ways of improving her co operation skills and being less controlling, without the need to resort to oppressive and sexist ideas.

Op I get this perspective and ime makes for a very happy marriage , it's about being brave enough to admit when you are feeling scared or insecure even if it's irrational rather than hiding these feelings which may then surface in moodiness etc, its nothing to do with who earns More, just being open to love

The video seemed to me to be yet another way of telling women that maintaining relationships is their job- all that "teach us how to lead" business. "Men are like dogs-easy to train" And what was that "slow down your movements"stuff all about? Make a cup of tea slowly and we'll never look at another woman......

Not RTFT - I imagine you're getting roasted for your choice of terminology .

I do get what you mean. I think the way i see it is 'don't be your DHs mother'.

It was horrendous Bertrand. I couldn't watch it all. If you do X, Y and Z then we won't look at another woman (ie if you don't, you can't blame us if we stray). And all that faux-pausing and swallowing before making his next point - yuck.

I see he is into tantric sex too

Does he do his fair share of the "leadership" things,
she states
I am exhausted from constantly fighting to control every little thing.
She'd "fighting" to control so the question really should be; is he allowed to try to do his fair share of "leadership" things?

I think he feels like he has no space to be decisive or to lead anything in our marriage. So he feels that I don't trust him because I do or decide most things. I'm not often vulnerable and in fact, probably very much the opposite. So he never has the chance to "protect" me.

My marriage could have ended up like this. I'm efficient, decisive and often overly optimistic - a "doer". OH is a pedant, a procrastinator and a ditherer. Obvs, I end up leading on most things because everything---- in our household would turn to feck if I didn't.

We had a few conversations early on that could have descended into OH telling me he was feeling "emasculated", or whatever, but I'm sorry, it's not on. I was firm about saying that he'd either have to step up and meet my drive and energy halfway or ship off. He has and we're happier than most.

I don't think women should surrender themselves to anything. You are obviously an intelligent, capable woman who has taken control of certain aspects of your life/relationship which perhaps traditionally and certainly it appears from your DH's point of view, for which the man should be responsible.

I would tell your DH they are now his responsibility, that you recognise you may have been a little over controlling. Stand back and let him get on with it basically.

I don't see a place in an equal relationship to have to massage the man's ego to make him feel like a hero. I think its ridiculous.

it is the association of ideas here that makes it a feminist issue

Exactly my point. It really isn't, it's about the interaction of 2 different personality types regardless of gender. Feminists are prone to seeing causation in any given situation and not seeing the bigger picture which means they don't see the solution because they are misreading the problem.

Attitudes like this are why I identify as a Humanist, not a feminist.

Attitudes like this are why I identify as a Humanist, not a feminist.

Have you considered just being honest and identify as misogynist?

You want the status quo of patriarchy to continue, you say you look at the bigger picture - and if you looked at the bigger picture, you have seen women are oppressed in patriarchy.

You have seen this, and you want it to stay like this, and you agree that women should submit to men, so men don't feel emasculated.

I am glad you don't identify as feminist, it shows self-awareness. But you should realize that you aren't really a humanist if you only care about male humans.

And what was that "slow down your movements"stuff all about? Make a cup of tea slowly and we'll never look at another woman...

You know when I have slowed my movements down? When playing a zombie in larp, that's when.

So I suppose what men want, according to that video, is a soulless piece of meat that moves only at the orders of its master. Very appealing.

(I mean, I do enjoy sleeping until noon, which means I don't move fast, or move much at all, but I don't think that's what is meant.)

The pausing and swallowing was nauseating - like he was making some big sacrifice to express 'hard truths' Misogynist prick.

"it's about the interaction of 2 different personality types regardless of gender."
Really? The video seemed to me to be making it very clear that it was about men and women. Did you watch a different one?

The video is clearly gendered: it is explaining what all men need from some women (the non-naturally submissive kind).