My Blog is Not Dead

Hello to all,

Several people have now enquired as to whether or not I am still actively maintaining this blog. The answer is that I am indeed - and I am hearing you loud and clear. I am afraid however that I am very busy at the moment (in fact I'm out of the country at the moment writing this on a public hotel computer - no wireless here!). Also - as I mentioned to the redoubtable Ms Saharah Eve - I need to feel inspired to write. I am in awe of those bloggers who can write every day. If I tried that, you would all have to hear what I had for breakfast!

I will answer some of the recent posts and perhaps come up with a new entry soon I hope. Thank you for reading.

Towards a Female Led Society - Part Two (The marketing of FLR)

In my last article I asked how we could progress to a Female-led society. I have no real answers, but some suggestions and, I'm afraid, yet more questions.

One of the correspondents (Bob) to this site (and, by the way, I am always grateful for feedback, opinions, suggestions and support!) made the very perceptive comment that in fact many more households are female-led than perhaps we think; with wives making decisions, controlling the finances and sharing the services of their menfolk (read his comments here, and here). Whilst this is undoubtedly true, were you to question either member of such a marriage if they consider themselves to be living in a female-led relationship or in a female supremacist marriage I suspect that either party, male or female, would probably laugh and deny it. They make make some joke, intended to be ironic, about “she's the boss” or some such – but it would be intended to convey humour.

So why would such couples deny the reality of the situation? Why not acknowledge the fact that the wife is the head of the household? Other than societal conditioning and patriarchal peer pressure, once again I have no real answer.

Another question. Given the unquestioned rise of women in western society, and given the communication revolution that has been wrought by the Internet, why is is still the case that there are more men seeking a female-led relationship than there are women? It is often said that there are around 10 submissive men for every dominant woman. I have no empirical evidence to support that number, but as I write today the (albeit very unscientific) poll on this blog has around 11:1 men:women responses. Now this is perhaps unsurprising in a blog of this nature – I'm pleasantly surprised that any women at all would read this – but few sites, even the redoubtable “She Makes the Rules” site, have a much better ratio.

On the face of it this disparity seems strange. Women the world over complain that their men don't do enough around the house, that they are not valued, and that men don't do as they are told; and yet there are thousands of men who want to live in the service of their wives. What woman would not want to to live in a household where her word was law, where housework – all housework – was a man's job, and where she is worshipped as a Goddess or treated as a queen? The answer to this question is complex. In part it is because few women have been brought up to expect this position, and in part it is because women can function in an environment based upon equality, in a way that men cannot, and often strive for equality in a relationship when actually they would be better to assert their natural superiority.

I need to explain that statement. Both William Bond (a prolific writer and Female Supremacist) and Ms Blanche Black (an intelligent and thoughtful proponent of Matriarchy) make much the same points; they argue that

“[women] are far better communicators and can discuss among themselves what needs to be done, with far less conflict and so can work together without a leader”,¹

and so strive for equality. Men on the other hand are essentially competitive pack animals who look to become the pack leader, but who will show obedience to recognised authority such as with military hierarchies or sports coaches. As Ms Black says:

“...the men of our culture publicly show reverence and submission all the time. They show reverence for and unquestioning submission to rituals of national unity, fraternal rights of passage, military superiors, and athletic coaches. They show emotional abandon and devotion towards sports teams, sports cars, and successful male role models. In plain sight, men who our society recognizes as masculine are submissive with certain people, and in certain contexts. They know that public submission and deference to others doesn't make them weak-willed, because society recognizes the ability of men to be submissive in certain relationships while remaining competitive and assertive in others. As long as their submission is aimed at men and male traditional values, no one has a problem with it.”²

It can be said therefore that men need authority and discipline, women on the other hand are more capable of seeing the bigger picture and are able to function in a consensus-driven environment.

What we need to do therefore is to demonstrate to women that men function better when given structure and clear leadership and that women, given their greater powers of perception and clear thinking, are better suited to providing that leadership. If it is clear to a man who is the leader of the pack he will follow that leader without question. It should be clear from this therefore that women should co-operate with one-another, but should take the leadership role with men. Aiming for equality will not work. Men respect leaders, and are happier when it is clear who that is.

So how can we persuade more women of the undoubted benefits of a FLR? I think that part of the problem lies in the image of female domination. Most women, I suspect, are aware of the fantasy figure of the leather-clad, thigh-booted, whip-wielding dominatrix and most regard it as frankly ridiculous. It is of course a male fantasy. Some women might happily embrace the image as a bit of fun or as a temporary game to spice up a saucy night of passion (usually to please their partner), but few would consider it as a realistic proposition as a lifestyle. And herein lies the problem; we need a better marketing department. We need to get the message out that FLR is not the same thing as pandering to a slightly ridiculous sexual fantasy, it is a framework for a happy and successful relationship which benefits both partners.

There are positive signs. Amongst the wealth of fantasy sites, there are more and more now which are focussed not on fetish and kink, but on the woman's wants and needs. The redoubtable She Makes the Rules site is a leader in this field, but there are many more. To find them however, you need to be looking. Few women, I suspect, go looking on the internet for Female-Led resources unless they have been prompted to do so (usually by a husband or boyfriend). What we need is some mainstream publicity. One idea that I would like to see might be an article in a leading women's magazine like Cosmopolitan or Company with a sympathetic author prepared to point out the myriad benefits to both male and female of a female-led relationship without any sniggering innuendo. That, together with a realistic landing pad (such as the SMTR site) where prospective women leaders would not be put off by leery fantasists could provide the catalyst to far more women embracing the lifestyle themselves or appreciating and encouraging it in others. That is only one suggestion. But there are still problems...Who could write such an article? (It would have to be written by a woman, from a woman's point of view) and how could we get it published in such a mainstream publication? Anyone know any journalists / publishers? Any other ideas? Do please add your comments.

¹ William Bond Why Men Are The Submissive Sex

² Ms Blanche Black Chivalry is Not Dead

By the way - do please read other posts by the above authors.
Ms Blanche Black
William Bond

Towards a Female Led Society?

If you click on links, you can hop from blog to blog, website to website and forum to forum and it is entirely possible to immerse oneself in totally Female Led world. Indeed, even avoiding the more lurid whip-cracking, thigh-booted pro-dominatrix sites (not that I have anything against them) one can find a wealth of well-written intelligent and thoughtful accounts of good people living a Female Led lifestyle; descriptions of marriages and relationships where the woman is the undisputed head of the household; tales of female authority and male obedience and numerous articles proposing the benefits of Female Supremacy. These are almost universally positive and laud the advantages, for both male and female, of a Female Led Relationship (FLR) or Female Led Society. Having spend a happy afternoon in this pursuit, you could be forgiven therefore for thinking that we are truly on our way towards a world ruled by women.

One only has to step outside one's front door however, to discover that we are not there yet...

Downtrodden and put-upon women are everywhere, women and girls are to be found mooning over unsuitable and inconsiderate men, and chauvinism is still alive and tolerated, if no longer actively condoned.

I would like to live in a Female Led world. Do I think I will ever see that day come? Not in my lifetime (I am in my late forties). Where do I think we are now and what sort of world would I like to see? Let me address the second part of that question first. I think that there are two models of society that are relevant here: the first is what might be termed the pre-Victorian era where women were not allowed to vote, not allowed to own property, were considered to be an adjunct to (or in some cases the property of) her husband who was assumed to be the unquestioned head of the household. This to me, with the roles reversed naturally, would be the ideal goal. I can't see this society coming about in any realistic time-frame however - if ever. The second model of society is what is sometimes referred to as the "1950s Household". My previous post (A Perfect World) typifies this. In this society the woman had her own life, but was seen very much in a supporting role to her husband who was of course the authority in the household. This type of society would, I believe, provide a very acceptable lifestyle to those of us in this community - again, naturally providing it is the wife in authority and the husband in the supporting role.

How close are we to this? Well, given what I said above about the difference between desire and reality, still not very close. If I said to a neighbour that I lived in an FLR I doubt that he or she would know what I meant. Even if they did, they might consider it at best a bit strange, and at worst perverted. I think that we as a community are where the gay community were in the early 60s. Homosexuality is now no longer illegal (I'm referring to the UK here), but few gay couples would openly declare their relationship for fear of ridicule, discrimination, persecution or worse. Now, some 4 decades on, whilst some gays still reside in the closet, most of us know of at least one gay couple living openly and happily as such. There are of course a few intolerant dissenters, but most people would take a "live and let live" attitude even if not entirely comfortable with homosexuality themselves. I would like to be able to say to someone "I live in a Female Led Relationship where my wife is the authority in the household" and for him or her to say something like "Oh yes, there's another couple in my street who live like that - nice people...."

Perhaps that's something I might see in my lifetime...

How to get there? That's the subject of another post.

A Perfect World?

Many of you will have seen this already. This is a genuine article from the 1950's publication "Housekeeping Monthly". I think this is a very good description of an ideal relationship and is as true today as it was then - just one teensey weeney little alteration is required to make this applicable to our modern society - I think that should be obvious to anyone reading this blog!

(If you click on the picture it will be a little more readable)

The Beta Male

I live in London and every week I take The Sunday Times. For those outside the UK, The Sunday Times is a highly respected "quality" broadsheet. One Sunday back in the autumn of 2007 I actually read this article by Kate Mulvey. I practically choked on my cornflakes...

What modern women want: a beta male

I recently stumbled across it again on the web the other day so I thought I would post about it here in order to bring it to a wider readership than just the UK.

I thought it extremely important that this article should get such mainstream exposure. At the time I thought it could have been the beginning of a seismic shift towards a Female Led society. Sadly I have have seen nothing of its like since and I have heard little more from its authoress.

The article is not overtly FLR but its subtitle is: "Men are surrendering in the sex war, taking on the supporting role" and its subtext is clearly FLR.

I encourage everyone to read it. Unfortunately you can no longer post comments. There is however a "recommended" button which you can click (just below Ms Mulvey's picture) and doing so will increment its score which may bring it to the editor's attention. If you agree with Ms Mulvey's thesis - and I suspect most of us here do - please click on this button to show your support.

At the time there were quite a few negative comments, largely from men, but sadly from some women too and I believe that it is incumbent upon us to get behind a commentator such as Ms Mulvey when she is brave enough to stick her head above the parapet and foretell the future in this way.

You can find the link to the article above, or here:
http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/relationships/article2602592.ece

Do have a look - and let me know what you think and whether or not you voted for the article...

The Power of Women - From a Ms Blanche Black blog

I followed a link today from another blog and stumbled into an Aladdin's cave of sublime written gems.

Ms Blanche Black in her superb blog writes beautifully about "Female leadership of men in relationships and society through female assertiveness, boundary setting, male discipline, and matriarchy"

This should be required reading for all - women and men alike - and Ms Black is clearly a visionary woman of the future. Women like this are in the vanguard in our journey towards a Female Led Society and all of us should do all we can to support and encourage them.

Go on over to her blog and be prepared to be blown away as I was by the quality of her insight as well as the quality of her prose.

If I may, I would just like to quote one piece (of the many) that caught my eye. From her article Being a Woman in Western Society:

"Physically, women are powerful to the same degree as men, or more so, through their inherent sensual beauty compared to men. Women’s sensual allure has a more pervasive influence on people than male physical aggression does, because it evokes men’s pleasure and instinctive allegiance towards the woman they encounter, simply by sight. It hypnotizes them, basically. It is a more subtle form of power than violence, and encourages social and political pacifism. The subtlety of women’s physical power makes it all the more powerful for lack of anticipation by others, and carries a lot less guilt than intimidation."

Beautiful - just beautiful. And so true!

More Thoughts on Female Supremacy

OK - So I'm not exactly the most prolific blogger in the blogosphere, but if any of my thoughts have generated interest of note it would have to be the article on Female Supremacy. I am going to take this opportunity to expand upon that article a little.

I think it's important to be grown-up about this. More men believe in the concept of Female Supremacy than women, but for many of those men it is a masturbatory fantasy in which whip-wielding goddesses rule the world and we men are kept in cages and brought out for their amusement and sexual pleasure... Well OK - but that world isn't going to happen any time soon - or ever...

If we are to bring about a world that I suspect most people reading this blog would like to see; a world which is Female led, a world in which political and commercial leaders are largely women, a world in which Female Led relationships are the norm and where husbands promise to "love honour and obey", where housework is "men's work" - then we need to ensure that the term Female Supremacy is understood.

The problem is that even those women (and some men) that share the above vision would not describe themselves as Female Supremacists. I think that the reasons for this are complex, but have a great deal deal to do with the unpleasant historical connotations of the term as I mentioned in my previous post. If we are to reclaim the term so that more women are comfortable with it and are happy to describe themselves as the Superior Sex then we must clarify what Female Supremacy really means. Now I would be interested to hear from others what it means to them, but this is what it means to me...

Does it mean to me that ALL women are superior to ALL men?
No. As I pointed out in my last post on the subject that would clearly be ludicrous.

Does it mean that in a Female Led Relationship the woman is superior to her husband in every way?
No. Although I accept my wife as my leader, even she would accept that there are some things I am better at than her. Her skill lies in using that to her advantage. I am a far better driver than my wife, but as she says - why does she need to drive? - she has me to drive her...

So as I said before, what I mean is that "on average" women are superior to men, and superior in most respects (the ones that matter). So whilst not all women are superior to all men, in general, for every man there is a woman who is his better and whom he should be proud to serve.

And what of the reality of Female Supremacy? Well you can find a multitude of views and counter-views but the evidence is clear; girls are outperforming boys in schools and women are outperforming men in the workplace so the movement is underway. The change is slight however and whether or not we will achieve a truly matriarchal society in my lifetime is remains to be seen.

It is encouraging to see however that more and more women ARE declaring themselves to be Female Supremacists and, rather than being pilloried or ridiculed, are being praised and sought-out for their views as beacons for the future. Women such as Elise Sutton, Diana Vesta, Paige Harrison, Barbara Wright Abernathy and of course the beautiful and redoubtable Ms Saharah Eve (formerly known as Mistress Dolly) are all much in demand for their forward thinking views on the nature of a Female Led society.

There are other positive signs too. One Sunday morning late in 2007 I was delighted to find in my morning paper - The Sunday Times (a quality British broadsheet) this article by Kate Mulvey in which she argues that men are beginning to accept the fact that they need to support their more successful female partners. I encourage everyone to read the article (and by the way - click on the "recommended" icon to move it up a few more notches...). Without wishing to spoil your enjoyment of her excellent article I will just reproduce here the final paragraph:
"Having grown up with successful women such as Margaret Thatcher and Madonna as role models, and with popular culture awash with fantasies of all-powerful women, from Lara Croft to Buffy the Vampire Slayer, men are not so uncomfortable with the woman in control. This value system recognises the trend of female supremacy, which while not as yet the norm seems to be pointing the way for future relationships."

Naturally she says it better than I could possibly do!