The Dynamic System of Submissiveness and Dominance

                                         The Dynamic System of Submissiveness and Dominance


                          Good morning readers. As I check my stats I see that readership has completely dropped off and that's fine. Be it that the subject is boring. Or maybe it's that the traffic source has dried up.  No matter. This was a very hard class for me and when I was teaching palmistry I worked with a well recognized venue that provided many interested students, (All woman I might add.) As always check previous posts for updated info about psychic reading techniques. I'm always adding to the book even when the subject was first outlined back in April.

                          As for my education it was important for my teacher to break up the monotony. The Dynamic System of Submissiveness and Dominance, is an excellent way to bring up the yin and yang of Meta Formal Logic again. As with many things about bias and the circularity of events people usually get things backwards. Rarely is any one ever totally dominant or submissive. That's just popular prejudice. I say, "If we had a contest of who were the most dominant people in the twentieth century, I say it would be a toss up between the Dali Lama and Mr. Rogers." (Mr. Rogers was a harmless but very influential children's program personality here in the states. He would deal with very important issues in utterly supportive non threatening ways.) Both of these men are deserving of our trust and they are indomitable. When they spoke, people cooperated.

                          Being able to inspire trust and confidence requires a person to be worthy. Fear, violence and intimidation are always learned from someone who themselves has been intimidated. Non violence is indomitable. Once someone refuses to be intimidated they can no longer be controlled just by the threat of harm. No where is the myth of dominance more backward than in intimate relations. The struggle for control and that illusion of dominance is often producing conflict. Cooperation necessitates giving and taking. Not the futile struggle for an appearance of dominance. The more obsessive someone is about their appearance of dominance, the more subservient that individual is. Bullies are subservient to violence and that compulsion to threaten violence. Everyone has known a cowardly bully who was afraid of being seen as weak. The demand for Dominatrix is highest amongst executives who are always bossing everyone else around. (Check and see what Hitler liked Eva Braun to do for him.)


                         Central to our "Wheel of Objectification," {Mirroring and Empathy (Subjective Boundary Definitions) May 26th, 2013} is that object attachment of the "security blanket." Central to all self deception is that illusion of security and control, and the complacency that comes from feeling immune. My own Mother married a used car dealer in her second marriage, just to make sure we had a dad. The man ended up dying in a heroin sting. Bad man. Horrible unworthy father. We often want to believe that we must act submissive, that we are supposed to submit. We are often expected to avoid taking responsibility. I think people who speak of needing to be submissive to God are very brave. This type of reasoning however lends itself to letting others decide who speaks for God. In such circumstances a woman is always worthy of a man who himself should be worthy of trust. This is not always the case. Our species is coming out of a spiritual dark ages. Atheism for good reason can be very comforting and bracing at the same time. Rebellion is usually not the best answer to societies ignorance, but neither is apathy or denial. I'm not a fan of that illusory fantasy of dominance. So then gentlemen, just because most women are innately more cooperative than us men, this of and by itself does not make a woman submissive, at all. To the contrary, cooperation {listening and then communicating} is the only real key to dominance. Get it straight guys. You want women to trust you? Earn it.

                           I have a dear friend who is a quadriplegic. As the central person in his business, he is in essence dominant, although he could not hurt anyone. he says, "The control is with his staff, they are by definition submissive." No ill motives incline him to abuse his power. He needs us. We need him. We must cooperate with him. He is worthy of our trust. Wes says, "Dominance and submission are about peoples desire for happiness." People confuse the desire for control with dominance. I say. It is much easier to dominate people by not trying to control them. I work with a lot of big guys, some are very aggressive, it's always easier to get them to cooperate than it is to manipulate them. I like to say men are horses, not dogs. We want to make our own decisions. Never chase anyone, it doesn't work anyways. Inspire. These guys are much bigger and stronger and for the most part much younger than me, and yet I'm respected and trusted. I would hope that in the long run, I will earn your trust as well.