My want is to worship you, to serve and obey you, to always put your needs above mine. You are my superior. You are strong, intelligent, sensitive and compassionate. You are Woman and you are beautiful.

Thursday, February 22, 2007

Labels, Who Needs Them?

I’m becoming annoyed and frustrated by the negative attitudes of some within this community towards those of us who are trying to find our way within a Female Led Relationship.

Personally I don’t see the difference in definition between a Female Led Relationship (FLR) and Loving Female Authority (LFA). In fact, I don’t see the need for a definition at all.

Yet I recently read a post from a self proclaimed “slave” to his female partner who was critical of those involved in Loving Female Authority (LFA) relationships.

In part he said:

“So it is sad for me to say that I just don't get these so-called LFA relationships. I've read several bloggers and other writers involved in or looking to get involved in these types of relationships. Occasionally, one of them will even have a good idea that causes me to reflect on my own relationship and how I can better serve my Owner. But for the most part, I just can't wrap my head around their outlook.”

Now this seems puzzling to me. Here is a male who, by his own acknowledgment, is in a long-term relationship with a woman. He loves and values his partner and she loves and values him. He defers to her judgment and states that it is this deferral which makes the relationship work so well.

In another post he says:

“I will defer to her judgement. This is the thing that makes our relationship work so well, that I am more interested in obeying her than feeling I am "right" and that I trust her judgement to guide us along the correct path, even if I don't necessarily agree with her view.”

Yet he doesn’t see himself in a Loving Female Authority relationship. Moreover, he says he “doesn’t get these so called LFA relationships.”

“I have to honestly say, I don't understand the attraction for others to these LFA relationships. But I have to laugh every once in a while when I get lumped into that same group. We are very different creatures indeed.”

From his postings it appears that LFA relationships are partly defined where one sex is considered to be inferior to the other: “So I have trouble understanding how emotionally healthy it can be to be in a relationship where one sex is considered to be inferior to the other”.

A Female Led Relationship, Loving Female Authority, Female Led Marriage – what do these terms mean?

Does it really matter? Do we need a definition? Why are some within this community disparaging of others simply because of the term they use to describe their love and devotion towards their female partner.

Who says all males within a LFA relationship believe they are inferior to their female partners? Some may believe they are inferior. Others may not. Who cares? And why the need to criticize those who do?

It seems to me the terms Female Led Relationship and Loving Female Authority mean different things to different people – and so they should. Peoples relationships evolve in different ways.

For my part I have latched onto the term “Female Led Relationship” because to me it best described what I wanted from my relationship. Formal definitions don’t come into it.

And I am certainly not about to start making negative value judgments on others who choose to use this term to describe their own unique relationships.

Now I know there are other readers who have reflected on my progress (or lack of it) in a FLR. And several have used my post to question the merits of my approach. Indeed some have used my setbacks to justify their own preconceived notion on how a FLR should function.

To them I would say keep an open mind.

Please don’t criticize me for the way I go about trying to progress a Female Led Relationship.

Please don’t make value judgments on how I relate to my wife, on how I express my own submission, what I say to my wife or what I do.

We are all trying to find our own way – in our own way. That’s the meaning of life.

FLR, LFA, BDSM, Femdom, S&M or whatever. Labels – who needs them?

5 comments:

saratoga said...

I guess I need them to understand why some of my drives and feelings are so different from other males who wish to not lead a relationship.

That's why, for communications purposes, I describe my own relationship as 'alternative lifestyle FemDom.' We do things that are not mainstream, which seems different from most LFA/FLR ones about which I have read.

I don't judge, but sometimes, for my own purposes of understanding differences, I do attempt to describe.

Within a relationship, between the male and female partners, clearly, no label is necessary. The activities and attitudes define the relationship.

However, in order to communicate to others, say, on....a blog!?....labels are useful. Or at least some descriptors.

How else does one understand the context of your actions, feelings, thoughts, etc.?

If, for example, my relationship necessarily involves punishment by my Domina, and yours does not, might that imply that we have radically different types of relationships? And that there might be less in common between them than if both did involve punishment?

To a reader of two blogs about such relationships, might not s/he be confused if both self-referred as "FemDom?"

-saratoga

subservire said...

I guess my point is that labels are rarely an accurate description and they are often confusing - or simply incorrect.

For instance, the blogger I referred to in my last post seems to believe males in a LFA relationship consider themselves inferior to their female partners. That's not the general case.

My point is that, if one describes his or her relationship as LFA or FL, he/she is generally pigeonholed in a defined role.

Yet it seems to me most FL/LFA relationships are much broader - some incorporate corporal discipline, sexual denial, domination etc.

Yes, we use labels for communication. As I said, I use FLR. But by saying I'm in a FLR, don't assume it's simply a case of wanting my wife to lead in the relationship. There are many other variables - as there are in most relationships.

Personally I'd like our relationship to develop into more of a "Femdom" lifestyle, but it would still be a FLR. The term FLR does not describe my actions, feelings, thoughts etc. as you say. That's the point. It's an extremely general term. Therefore, it annoys me when someone says he "doesn't get those LFA relationships." By what definition is he qualifying LFA?

Am I making any sense?

Mistress Laura's boy said...

Hi there. Yes, you are making sense. I completely agree with Saratoga's point about communicating with others.

I also get what you are saying (which he also stated) regarding how the labels are not that useful inside the relationship.

For me and my Mistress, I like the label she used on my one time: We are in a YMB relationship. "You're My Bitch." :-) :-)

saratoga said...

subservire-

yes, I think you are making sense. we may have different appetites, but for yourself, your relationship and desires, I understand your point.

-saratoga

helpmate hubby said...

you make perfect sense subservire, the guy on the other blog did not and i left a belated note telling him as much on that post you referenced.

The guy loves his girl, she is a female, and he submits to her authority, what part of LFA doesn't he understand?