Sunday, April 13, 2008

Leading By Example

A reoccurring issue that often seems to aggravate confident women in female-male relationships is the problem of a proposed female-loving man who tends to “top from the bottom”, so to speak, or feign devotion to pleasing a woman while only serving her in the ways that turn him on. Worse yet, some men claim to revere a woman's will, then try to push her to participate in sexual activities which they desire after she has made known to them that she does not.

This mixed message from the male can turn off a woman and even discourage her from sharing her dominant side with them at all. This situation confronts a woman with two choices- continue or leave. The question, however, is ‘can a woman stay with such a man and not be topped by him?’

I have found that men who try to dictate the terms of our encounters through their selective resistance are best dealt with by standing up for my principles and not backing down. My terms for our sexual activity or dating are the only ones that matter to me, and his resistance to them makes him less worthy of my time. Although, I do customize my expectations according to the varying capabilities of certain men if I think they have the potential to do much better for me in the future.

However, when I refuse to compromise the boundaries of my pleasure I risk being rejected by the man I am correcting for failing to heed them.

I have been walked away from by a number of men who initially showed respectful behavior towards me. Upon telling them something that clashed with their existing ideology on what they should be capable of, or what approach to relationship with women was best for them, those men disagreed with me and then withdrew. This has happened with two dating partners, once with an online admirer, and a few times with a past lover.

One dating partner originally responded to my corrections, but when it came time for him to admit his need to take direction from me rather than just giving me lip service and some flowers, he rejected my beliefs and my leadership.

Another dating partner took my comments that he should get a car, a proper place to live, and a broader range of dating skills to mean that my standards were too high for any guy to meet.

One online admirer had difficulty accepting some ideology he was unfamiliar with from me and stopped writing me.

And the past lover responded to my reprimanding of him several times by throwing an intellectual temper tantrum and threatening to leave.

Each of those times I refused to budge from my original perception of their difficulties, left them with a farewell correction, and let them follow their bright ideas elsewhere.

What eventually happened was that the first dating partner contacted me to flaunt that he had started to see someone else; then after two and a half weeks of silence he text messaged me, emailed me a few times, and sent me an overgenerous birthday present, all without my encouragement. The other dating partner started texting me a month later, right after he got a better apartment, and has been texting me since to offer new dating options, all of which I have ignored up to this point. The other admirer wrote me back after a while with a more open-minded response and has been chatting with me avidly since then. And the past lover wound up returning each time to ask for my forgiveness and admit I was right, with two-week delays each time, and eventually discovered for himself a passionate affinity with my way of seeing things to the neglect of his interest in other women for a year after I broke up with him.

What has this taught me? It has taught me that I don't have to be afraid of letting a man sulk. It has taught me that I don't have to be afraid of "winding up alone" for rejecting a man's unappealing treatment of me and not responding to him until he cooperates with my standards. Even when it requires me to be alone for a period of time, that demonstration of confidence from me eventually returns more male attention than it initially costs.

Because men follow women who lead. Men seek the attention of women who follow their own convictions. A man is motivated by a woman who rewards him with attention for joining her in following her convictions, and who denies him her attention for straying from them. And when a woman has convictions about how she deserves to be treated, and how a man is in need of treating her, her convictions become the goal post and every man a competitor. And men love to compete.

Men will doubt in their ability to reach her goals. Men will deny the validity of those goals and claim that no one can reach them. But when a woman is meeting her own goals with her own treatment of herself and her quality of life, it becomes obvious to men that her goals are attainable and it is their own performance that remains unconvincing.

This doesn’t mean that men don’t have certain needs and convictions of their own. Men are focused by nature and are at their best when their focus is singular. So, men have the need to keep their focus on one legal code, one authoritative standard, be it that of an institution, a gender group, or an individual. And each man has a need for a personal criterion for selecting that ultimate leader and deselecting the leadership of others.

A man who is open to female leadership uses his own criteria to select a female leader that inspires him in personal ways, outside of gender dynamics. However, it is the woman’s code of behavior and goals for quality of relationship that give him direction as to how to win her approval and inclusion of him in her plans.

What makes him attentive is not necessarily what pleases him. It is what challenges him mentally or socially, what indicates that there is a higher level of achievement for him to apply his efforts to, that gets and keeps his attention.

In the end, I follow myself- my own perceptions and beliefs that are
based on my feelings and experiential knowledge- because I am only happy when I am happy. And when I am happy, I am confident, which is the most alluring quality in a leader for those who like to follow.


Anonymous said...

Ms. Christina,

This complaint of men presumably dedicated to a female-led relationship "topping from the bottom" is so very common from women. And, once again, I think you've struck gold in your analysis of the problem and how to best deal with it.

I, like probably most other men, was originally attracted to female leadership in the form of the sexual fantasy of female dominance. I don't apologize for it; I think it's very natural and more common than we're led to believe. The problem, as usual, is that men have been raised to be self-centered and expect compliance with their wishes and this, ironically, extends even to their ideas of how a woman "SHOULD" lead.

My wife has always been very open to my suggestions on various aspects of our relationship and I'm always grateful of that; but I've found, much as you explain in your blog, that I'm most motivated and inspired by her when she insists on something that she wants even if it doesn't necessarily "turn me on." I've found (and you might find this funny) that submitting to her desires for me to do things that don't exactly turn me on...tend to turn me on more than when she's following my suggestions of how she should lead. She's noticing this unexpected response as well and it encourages her to be more assertive of her own ideas.

Of course, the important part is not that this is a turn on, but that she gets what she wants and our relationship is the better for it. So, I would say that this doesn't so much reflect that men don't know what they want, but that their fleeting fantasies and short-lived sexual satisfactions often conflict with what is best for them in the long run, i.e. a happy and healthy relationship with the woman they adore. Or as you very articulately express it, "It has demonstrated that, despite the fact that men think they know what they want, they quickly realize that they aren’t getting what they want from their own inventions."

Like you have found with your dating partners and admirers, I've found in my marriage: that I often disagree with my wife strongly and even throw temper tantrums, only to later realize that she was right all along. Naturally, my goal deriving from that realization is to stop wasting my energy and upsetting her needlessly with the tantrums, keeping my objections to myself until I've tried out what she insists on for a long period of time, and, if in the unlikely event that I still think she's wrong, I'll find some appropriate way of expressing that when (if) it ever happens.

I think another problem that men face is the fear that they'll actually get what they wish for and lose control to the woman. I've actually heard this fear explicitly stated by men. The fear seems to be that he'll so lose his identity that he'll become just Ms. So & So's "insignificant" other. While that may be a hot fantasy for many men, the potential reality is a bit frightening.

A man with a "normal" self-esteem should be able to overcome this fear with time and introspection. A man with below normal self-esteem should seek some professional help for his own good. If you're a true asset to your lady, it is highly improbable that you'd ever become "insignificant" and being a great woman's "significant other" is something for which to strive with zeal. The goal SHOULD be to lose a bit of your identity...particularly if you've chosen your leader wisely.

And, having said that, we men should keep in mind that our tantrums and rebelliousness sends a strong message of distrust in our leaders' effect, we're saying that we're not so sure that we have chosen wisely. We should think about how that may hurt the lady we've vowed to serve! I've done it and, man, it's so hard to "take it back." It's best to just not do it to begin with and deal with our insecurities in more appropriate ways.

As you state, Ms. Christina, it's important for women to stand firm in their conviction and insist on the man's full compliance. The truth is that rewarding a man's bad behavior will only encourage more bad behavior and giving in to his wishes when they strongly contradict yours isn't good for either.

Your conclusion that "men follow a woman who follows herself despite their reaction" is right on the money. A woman's loss of resolve in the face of her man's objections, tantrums, etc, isn't exactly a great leadership quality. If he succeeds in getting his way over her objections, he'll likely lose respect for her as a leader and things just go downhill from there. This can hardly be good for him either...particularly if his desire to serve is genuine.

I would say, even if you are doubting whether you're right, stand firm at the moment of "conflict." You can always change course after his compliance with your initial directions in a way that doesn't undermine your authority. If his desire to serve is genuine, allowing your authority to be undermined by his antics could do considerable harm to his respect for you and/or your confidence to lead him. If he's a "keeper" this is just tragic. If he's not genuine, it's just a waste of your time.

Well, I hope you don't take my rambling as trying to tell you something you don't already know. Your insight into what motivates men and why they do what they do has taught me things about myself that I couldn't have articulated better. I just thought it might help your cause to have a man confirm your observations and analysis of our behavior.

You are spot on in your analysis and I hope women reading your blog realize that there are men in the world who are beginning to get what many women have complained about for a very long time in regards to our behavior (particularly toward women). You were right all along and we're starting to get it. Don't doubt yourselves! If you lead, I am almost certain that men will ultimately follow.

Blanche Black said...


I enjoy hearing your description of these dynamics in your own life and can tell you are an enthusiastic supporter of Female leadership. One thing that I think is very important for both women and men to understand, however, is that if a man loses respect for a woman as his potential leader because he succeeds on pushing her out of her comfort zone, he is not a "keeper". If she has made her will known, his stubbornness is his failure to follow, not her failure to lead. This is a very important point, as it brings the focus of analyzing a man's behavior back onto the man rather than expecting a woman to change it.

A woman has the power to diffuse a man's more offensive strategies for testing her authority, if she sees the situation for what it is. However, and I can testify to this, a woman cannot make a man do anything, except, of course, illegally. She can only inspire him by expressing herself. If he rejects this inspiration, and her direction, then her backing down is not an indication that she has lost credibility as a leader but it is an indication that he has lost credibility as a follower and a listener in her eyes, and she is losing interest in him. A woman's loss of emotional interest in a man is indicated by her unwillingness to express herself to him, and therefore her unwillingness to be emotionally touched by him.

In my experience, what separates the truly submissive men from the boys is when a man responds to a woman's wavering assertiveness by seductively reminding her of her options for disciplining him out of a secret support for her victory.

Anonymous said...

Ms. Christina,

Your point is, as always, well taken. I think what was going through my head when I wrote the "keeper" thing was that women often have loving affection for men even when it's clear to the unbiased observer that the guy isn't going to make her happy.

I think what I'm concerned about is that women will doubt themselves and perhaps think that they're being "selfish" or "overburdening" the man. This is unnecessary since we're assuming that he has already expressed his desire to subordinate his wishes to the lady's and all she's doing is holding him to his word. He should appreciate that as well! And that leads me back to your main point, that the focus should be on the man and his commitments, not on his perception of the lady's "leadership qualities." -- Point Very Well Taken!

Richard said...

Ms. Christina,

I want to comment on your subtle and powerful formulation: "In my experience, what separates the truly submissive men from the boys is when a man responds to a woman's wavering assertiveness by seductively reminding her of her options for disciplining him out of a secret support for her victory."

First, I like the idea that the submissive males are the real men. Perhaps this is because the mature man has been able to temper or transcend his male ego. Women seem to identify with their ego-selves less strongly, which helps qualify them to be leaders. I think you've said somewhere that men tend to see things as either/or and view relationships in terms of winners and losers. Perhaps, the first step on the road to male maturity is to desire that the male be defeated in his competition with strong female leaders. This is the male version of "sweet surrender." There are many implications, one of which is the couter-intuitive idea that female mentorship may be necessary for a boy to become a man.

The next step perhaps is for the maturing man to learn to identify with feminine values such as gentleness, cooperation, nurturing, beauty and elegance, etc. That's where discipline comes in. That's where the deep appreciation of her leadership comes in.

I wonder if you would comment more on this?

This man is very willing to learn from you. You have much to teach.


Blanche Black said...

This is a beautiful description of the "sweet surrender" to a woman's desires that many men seem to experience when a dominant woman begins to captivate them. I have witnessed this emotional reaction in many men in various situations, even when they encounter strong willed and determined women on a casual basis in public. I think it is because men do perceive, whether they realize it or not, the higher intensity strength of will and determination that women develop, which they most often exhibit during difficult times in heroic ways for humanity and nature. I think most men already secretly admire and even seek to emulate the strength and noble behavior they have witnessed in women from their personal experience as well as from human history.

Frank said...

I was curious as to why men would stop dating you after several months, Ms. Black.
It seems that if they knew the level of service and behavior you expect from the start of the relationship, that they would be comfortable after several months or a year.
I was also wondering if you could give some examples of the type of service and behavior you expect. Besides the obvious chivalrous behavior, like being respectful, having good manners, always paying for dates, etc., do you expect your man to be completely obedient to you?
How do you expect him to serve you in addition to putting your pleasure first in the bedroom?
I am surprised that you don't get many more replies in your blog, considering all the valuable information it contains about matriarchy and FLR. Is that why you stopped adding to your blog?


Blanche Black said...


My, you do ask some rather personal questions...

In response to your question regarding why the men mentioned in this article left me- these men were not representative of all men. These men are examples of the immature man- someone who is conflicted about what they want in a woman and who also avoid responsibility for the consequences of their selfish attitudes towards women. There are a lot of men who exhibit this kind of arrogant and unpleasant behavior towards women. Some women put up with it, and bear the negative consequences of this kind of man's various forms of manipulation and irresponsibility. However, in this article I am encouraging women to refuse to accept this kind of behavior from such men by citing my behavior as an example. My experience has been that when I stood up for myself and told these men that their behavior was not acceptable to me, their reaction was to reject me for my self-respect, seemingly thinking that other women would require less thought, less adjustment, less energy to "get laid". Again, this attitude is not representative of masculinity or all men- it is a cultural phenomenon of patriarchy which perpetually lowers the entire society's moral and social standards for the masculine gender until men are ensured social favor regardless of their behavior, simply because they are men. This is also referred to as sexism.

The upside is that, regardless of patriarchal cultural conditioning, men's true nature seems to continue to call them back to seeking out and following strong, self-respecting women. My experience was that after these conflicted men walked away, they also came back trying to flirt with me again; this behavior was their way of hoping I would change my mind and lower my standards for sex in exchange for a little attention. (Young women who are under confident usually do, for lack of interpersonal experience). So, I'm really trying to encourage the lady readers to true to themselves and what they really want. In the end, the backlash they get from immature men is just another manipulation tactic, and nothing to take seriously.

Blanche Black said...

In response to your second question, regarding my style of interacting with men that do meet my standards: I am complex. I am not a sterotypical dominatrix. I simply like justice and know that expressing what you want is the first step to getting it.

I respect other people's identity, feelings, and personal boundaries. However, the way I employ "discipline" into my relationships is twofold, and sometimes threefold: enforcing personal boundaries, developing sexual games with my partner that fit both of our personalities, and trust-repair games.

Boundary setting: In this article, as well as some others on this blog, I am demonstrating boundary setting.

Sexual games: Wouldn't you like to know.

Trust-Repair games: I have witnessed this work surprisingly well for resolving relationship disputes where the man "screwed up"- said or did things he later regrets -and the woman wants to forgive him but can't emotionally: If a woman designs and directs a form of penance for the man to perform- one that wins back her trust by demonstrating his repentant attitude through willingness to endure a form of pain, self denial or humility- it can provide the necessary experience for her to regain her confidence in the relationship and completely let go all resentment over the experience. I think the form of discipline/amends really depends on the individual. It depends on the nature of the offense that threatens the intimacy between them, and what demonstrates the reverse of that. In my personal experience, it was the man I was dating who suggested this idea to me after he screwed up and noticed I had lost trust in him. Suddenly I felt hope that there was a way to reconstruct the trust- like a do-over for him and I. It was cathartic and became a bonding experience for us. The relationship ended later on for reasons out of both our control, but the experience demonstrated a principle I still believe in; it's the form that is flexible, based on the dynamic between the two personalities.

In reply to your third question: I don't post articles on this blog as frequently as I used to because I don't like repeating myself. I had a set of philosophies regarding what true intimacy between women and men would look like, as well as why I wasn't seeing many examples of it in this culture, based on my personal experiences; I covered this philosophy as it pertains to boundary setting and natural female leadership of men in this blog. I enjoy discussing philosophy on many topics with other people, and especially on these topics. And, so I keep the blog active and respond to comments on the blog. However, this blog operates more like a book than a weekly newsletter. I blog on other topics sometimes, when I see a need for something to be written that no one seems to be writing about or saying, but those articles would not fit in with the sex/romance themes of this blog, so I post them elsewhere.

My hope is that this blog is used as a resource for others to find validation and encouragement in pursuing their own personal journey into alternative lifestyles and matriarchal culture.

Frank said...

I appreciate your honesty and direct replies, Ms. Black. I am fascinated by the way you handle men. I apologize for getting too personal with my questions. I don't want to be disrespectful to you in any way. I like the way you make your personal boundaries clear to the men you date. If they "screw up" they have a chance to redeem themselves in your eyes. It is similar to when a man buys flowers or a gift to make up with a woman after an argument. Your method may involve more pain or humiliation, but the desire to apologize and win back your trust is the important thing.
I would like to know about the sexual games you have developed, but I respect your privacy, Ms. Black.
I don't know how long it will take for our society to become Matriarchal, but it could offer a lot of benefits.

Blanche Black said...

Yes, exactly. With this approach, discipline serves a function-to make genuine amends, thereby enhancing intimacy. Sex play and kink are the natural reward for achieving and maintaining intimacy.

Frank said...

You are a very beautiful, intelligent, sexy, and loving woman, Ms. Black. What man wouldn't desire to serve and please you and learn from your wisdom?

Blanche Black said...

And you are very charming...

Blanche Black said...


You can email me at

Ms. Black

Frank said...

Miss Christina, do you think the woman should always be the leader and authority in a relationship? Should she have the final say in all decisions and control all the finances including giving the man an allowance? What if the man makes a significantly higher income?

Blanche Black said...


If the relationship is a committed legal or common-law marriage, a husband's income has a direct effect on his wife. His work schedule also has a direct effect on his wife, limiting his availability to tend to her sexual and reproductive desires. Therefore, all of his decisions pertaining to money should be approved of by his wife before he acts on them.

Historically, men in Jewish marriages required the permission of their wife before taking a new job, since the work hours, income, and location all would have a direct impact on her and her right to sexual affection and reproductive services from the man. This is wise and should be done in every marriage, in my opinion.

So, yes, regardless of the income of a man, his wife should have the final say on all monetary decisions, because the importance of her decision on the use of their money, as well as his decision on the use of their money, is not based on who contributes more to their mutual expenses. Those decisions are important because they will effect quality of life for both of them equally, and in some cases it might effect the woman even more than the man.

So husbands should always rely on their wife's input and approval before taking on or making financial commitments of any kind.

That being said, he is also responsible for being aware of his monetary needs and communicating them to his wife. If he has a serious need that is important to him but which his wife denies him money for, then he is responsible for making clear that her support of him meeting that need will make or break the relationship.

If a husband honestly thinks he is seriously being taken advantage of or abused by the woman he has decided to share his life with and given this authority to, I would say he should seriously consider a divorce.

Frank said...

Thank you for taking the time to reply to me, Mistress Christina. It helps me to understand your reasoning when you put it in writing. That way I can read it a few times and let the logic sink in. You are much smarter than me. You also helped me realize that if a woman assumes her role as the natural Leader in our relationship then who am I to question her authority or decisions. Being a Leader means accepting responsibility for your decisions in addition to telling your partner what to do.