Should men own women?

[boxing123]

Yes, it sounds ridiculous and offensive, but let me explain.

 

After meeting and getting to know many women, I think they would prefer to be literally owned. ESPECIALLY ONCE THEY REACH A CERTAIN AGE. When they are young, perhaps they are overly idealistic. Great career, great money, freedom, love, family, they can have it all!

 

See, us men often times become confused.. What do women want? They want equality, but want a man "to be a man". Some of a woman's "wants" seem to stem from the media, and some seem to stem from simply being a biological woman. Which force is stronger in forming what a woman really wants? Which would make them truly happier? Being the media form of a woman, biological, or some impossible hybrid?

 

The media seems to promote "independence". Equality. Strong women whom do not NEED a man.

 

Biologically women are the physically weaker sex, and are more vulnerable especially during times of pregnancy. So biologically they NEED a strong man.

 

So how can men be both? When will the line be crossed from being "strong" to "controlling". Or equal, but not taking the lead enough?

 

This is why I think women really would prefer being owned. They are a man's possession. He does not stray. He gives her love and great sex. He takes the lead. He supports her, and she knows he always will. She trusts him. She has no worries. She will not have to worry about one day working to support him. Or have the pressure of having to work out of necessity to eat.

 

I think no matter what, women will always inside (if they admit it or not) prefer the above to being truly "equal".. Both splitting everything, both deciding everything, both paying equally, maybe switching off whom pays bills, no gender roles, no leader, etc.

 

Maybe "equal" means different things to men and women. When I hear the term, I think of truly 100% equal. I do not think of having special privileges, or certain fine lines to cross or not to cross, that I should just inherently know about.

 

For a man to be a man, a woman must give herself to him fully, and relinquish control. You cannot be the bossy, controlling, independent type, and just expect men to know exactly how to lead you if you are fighting against it yourself.

[dreamergrl]

Everyone is different. There is no right or wrong answer. Different people have different wants and needs.

[Kasan]

You took the words right out of my mouth! :D

 

Yeah........I know my place alright.....exactly three steps behind a man, and barefoot and pregnant right??:lmao:

 

I am assuming this thread was started as it was a slow day at work and stirring up the Shackers seemed like a good idea???:lmao:

 

Well alrighty then..............

[Lizzie60]

No.. no.. you got it all wrong.. it's the opposite..

 

Women should own a couple of men... I have a few myself..

[Kasan]

No.. no.. you got it all wrong.. it's the opposite..

 

Women should own a couple of men... I have a few myself..

 

:lmao::lmao:

[DMoon]

Yes, it sounds ridiculous and offensive, but let me explain.

 

After meeting and getting to know many women, I think they would prefer to be literally owned. ESPECIALLY ONCE THEY REACH A CERTAIN AGE. When they are young, perhaps they are overly idealistic. Great career, great money, freedom, love, family, they can have it all!

 

For a man to be a man, a woman must give herself to him fully, and relinquish control. You cannot be the bossy, controlling, independent type, and just expect men to know exactly how to lead you if you are fighting against it yourself.

 

Well since you put it that way. You may want to consider the polygamist cult--Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints—Ranch in Texas, since they have re-opened their doors and may be amenable for applications for retro-Neanderthals. Those women and children are owned, have no real rights—Taliban style--and the men have a virtual harem of near pubescent wives. The men there are so strong and in control.

[Cherry Blossom 35]

Good idea, D-Moon, but I wonder if they have internet access there?

[mr.dream merchant]

As long as you put in good dick game and treat her nice, I'd say you'd might as well own it, they aren't going anywhere but into your arms.

[boldjack]

This a great idea. Back when I was a serial cheater, I used to put"down payments" on several models, many times I "test drove" other men's models. So does this mean that I could "trade-in" one that had worn out or had some bugs in it?

[Untouchable_Fire]

Biologically women are the physically weaker sex, and are more vulnerable especially during times of pregnancy. So biologically they NEED a strong man.

 

You need to go back and actually study biology. Plus, wanting to feel safe has nothing to do with being owned.

 

Ughhh... Some of you guys are just an embarrassment to the rest of us.

[2sure]

You know , I see what the OP is saying and ...I kind of agree.

When I was younger, I had to have control of everything and I did. Even in relationships. But I wasnt that good at it and the relationships were not good matches for me. I wanted to have everything, be independent, in control - I was doing ok but it was hard for me.

 

My husband had never been married. He had always had complete control of his life and was successful. He didnt want a partner who he would be competing with for control.

 

Sometimes, somebody has to be in charge. My H is in charge. We have very few arguments, we share decisions about our family, and although we usually end up agreeing - the final decision is his. And he usally doesnt invoke it, but the last word can be his as well - I dont need it. Usually. If I'm really PO's - its mine.

 

I dont have to give thought to finances , cars, mortgage, etc. All the stuff I screwed up before regardless of how much money I had.

 

Yet, I dont feel subserviant. We work. He is better at being in charge than I am. I know this. I'm happy to give it up to be honest.

[Untouchable_Fire]

Yet, I dont feel subserviant. We work. He is better at being in charge than I am. I know this. I'm happy to give it up to be honest.

 

Your husband is a quality guy. Not all that many of my friends are like that.

 

So, your relationship is great, but it will only work for some.

[I'm Joe]

This may not be very popular... So please forgive me ladies of loveshack.. as this is but a mere observation.

 

To all the married women. When you got married, did your father not "give" you to your husband as though you were a possession, having your owner change hands? I know most people probably don't consider it when they get married but it is by todays values a very sexist tradition.

[2sure]

Yep - it has to be the right guy. Giving control up to a man that cannot handle it can lead to abuse. This I know.

 

And dont get me wrong - we have had issues , thats how I got here.

But as far his "owning " me , in a way he does. Fortunately, he doesnt see this as a burden - he feels being responsible for his family is a privilege.

 

I am not independent. I am not in control. Been there, done that. As a woman "of a certain age"....I was glad to give it up.

[Ocean-Blue]

While your post has some merits, you shot yourself in the foot with your title. You can't "own" another person in the legal sense, obviously. Nor can you "own" them emotionally. To own something, whatever it is, is to strip that thing of it's autonomy. No one want a drone for a partner, man or woman. A man can be the provider, without staking claim to his woman, as if she were some kind of property.

[Stockalone]

Yes, it sounds ridiculous and offensive, but let me explain.

 

...

 

This is why I think women really would prefer being owned. They are a man's possession.

 

In a way, yes, I do need to own my woman. I am possessive, territorial and protective. It's difficult sometimes not to appear as overly controlling. But I also don't mind being "owned" in return.

 

 

He does not stray. He gives her love and great sex. He takes the lead. He supports her, and she knows he always will. She trusts him. She has no worries.

 

If you make that he emotionally supports her, then I agree with you. But I don't mind the traditional role either where the woman stays home and the man works. If there are kids involved, that is what I'd like if that is financially feasible. But that has nothing to do with being owned and such feelings should be mutual in a relationship.

 

She does not stray. She gives him love and great sex. Even though he leads (or she lets him lead), he doesn't mind if she intervenes if he is about to make the wrong decision. In fact, he loves her for it. She emotionally supports him, believes in him, and he knows she always will. He trusts her. He has no worries.

[Trialbyfire]

I believe in both parties in a relationship, owning in each other, as in owning the physical and emotional fidelity of each other.

 

Unilateral owning is just slavehood and smacks of insecurity. The need to control your partner, without giving up any part of yourself, is someone who's not only pathetically insecure/needy but incredibly selfish.

[2sure]

In fact, in my opinion, it takes a particularly strong, self aware, and confident woman ...to give up the control to her man. I am all of that.

 

Its not the concept so much as the verbiage.

[Sam Spade]

Yep - it has to be the right guy. Giving control up to a man that cannot handle it can lead to abuse. This I know.

 

And dont get me wrong - we have had issues , thats how I got here.

But as far his "owning " me , in a way he does. Fortunately, he doesnt see this as a burden - he feels being responsible for his family is a privilege.

 

I am not independent. I am not in control. Been there, done that. As a woman "of a certain age"....I was glad to give it up.

 

 

This is very reassuring. The OP is unnecessarily provocative and borderline tasteless, but the kind of relatoinship you describe is the one I want. As a man, I would feel comfortable devoted and giving it all to my family and being in charge only insofar I have a woman at home who's 'got my back' like you do. It's not about "ownership", but about finding complementary roles and taking care of each other.

 

(The dynamics in many contemporaty marriages is exaclty the opposite - men walk on egg-shells and no matter what they o, their entitled wives would leave them at the first sign of harship. If so, what's the point?)

[Kasan]

It's not about "ownership", but about finding complementary roles and taking care of each other.

 

Yes, this is what a partnership is, it's not a matter of owning each other.

 

I dislike the whole term of "owning each other."

[marlena]

I don't want to possess or be possessed! Sounds demonic!!

[tigereyes12]

Women are not biologically weaker. It's a matter of men and women evolving differently (both in a societal and a biological sense) in order to better carry our certain tasks. However, in modern society where men don't need to hunt and women don't need to gather or rear quite as many children, the biological differences are essential vestigial. Yes, we are hard wired, or at least a goodly portion of us are, to pick men who can care for us/our young (remember, this can also be a highly intelligent but physically weak male...not just Manly Men), but that in no way equates to ownership or weakness. That just makes sense...as men are programmed to pick women who will likely be able to provide and take care of healthy children. It's natural selection and without it, humans probably wouldn't have made it very far. You, however, imply that women wanting a genetically fit husband to best ensure the survival of subsequent offspring equals ownership...which is just plain silly.

[Cherry Blossom 35]

You know , I see what the OP is saying and ...I kind of agree.

When I was younger, I had to have control of everything and I did. Even in relationships. But I wasnt that good at it and the relationships were not good matches for me. I wanted to have everything, be independent, in control - I was doing ok but it was hard for me.

 

My husband had never been married. He had always had complete control of his life and was successful. He didnt want a partner who he would be competing with for control.

 

Sometimes, somebody has to be in charge. My H is in charge. We have very few arguments, we share decisions about our family, and although we usually end up agreeing - the final decision is his. And he usally doesnt invoke it, but the last word can be his as well - I dont need it. Usually. If I'm really PO's - its mine.

 

I dont have to give thought to finances , cars, mortgage, etc. All the stuff I screwed up before regardless of how much money I had.

 

Yet, I dont feel subserviant. We work. He is better at being in charge than I am. I know this. I'm happy to give it up to be honest.

 

2Sure, I'm glad you found an arrangement that works for you and your husband. I couldn't do it, wouldn't even consider it, but that's freedom for you. You can make your own way and I can make mine.

 

I have a friend who has a similar relationship. At first, it seemed to work really well. She, like you, was happy to give up some of the control. She was never good with money anyway! I have spent enough time with them to see it in action, and while I wouldn't be happy, she always seemed to be.

 

Unfortunately, her husband seems to be running away with the control now. He always makes the decisions on everything, whether she likes it or not. They lived in a really beautiful town, but he wanted to move, so they moved. Now she has no friends in her new town. Most people her age there have kids, and they have none as of yet. She really needed a job, but every time she came home with a new prospect, he shot it down. They really need the money right now, because his salary as a teacher just isn't enough for the two of them. They want to buy a house, but have no money for the down payment, which is why she was looking for a job. So right now she sits around all day waiting for him to come home. She is bored to tears.

 

Anyway...she finally found something that she was really excited about, and it paid decently as well. She would have worked next door to her husband, so they could have commuted to work together, eliminating the need for a second car. Guess what? He shot it down. Now she really wants to put her foot down, but since she gave up any claim to control in the relationship, she is not getting far.

 

I think it's pretty screwed up.

[Taramere]

Only a weak, wilfully self-deceiving mediocrity would need to "own" a partner. Would I waste my life by passing control over it onto someone like that? No chance.

 

Power's something you give over to the person with an ego that's tough enough to handle it wisely and fairly. Giving it to someone who needs that power to protect their fragile ego from any challenges is almost bound to lead to abuse - or, at the very least, horrendous disappointment and disillusionment.

[Trialbyfire]

2sure, I can't imagine allowing anyone to take care of me, although my man is capable of it without missing a beat. I also have zero desire to take care of another adult, but I'm also fully capable of doing so, also without missing a beat.

 

If you're comfortable and happy with your arrangement, good for you and I mean that sincerely. Many of us have an allergic reaction to being controlled. For example, my expertise is finance and fiscal responsibility. I enjoy it and would never give control up to anyone...bar none, including my parents, who I trust 100% to consider my best interests, for matters of import.