Is women being in submissive the ultimate and final stage of

>>137050920

women are submissive by nature, it is a requirement, yes. final redpill? I dunno about that

>What does /pol/ think about Dom/Sub relationship? Has anyone been in one?

every normal/healthy relationship is dom/sub, but it does not need to be fetishized; that's taking it too far, that's the lady protesting too much

>>137050920
it's a pretty cute, and pretty stable, relationship type. so long as your dom actually does care about you and you trust his judgement.

Aka benevolent dictatorship, the best type of government

i'm in a femdom/findom open relationship AMA

File: 2i7xrma.gif (612KB, 500x300px) Image search: [Google]

612KB, 500x300px

>>137052350
OP here. I was kinda in stuck in a rut and had no one to talk too, my mom had a coworker at work that had a daughter, being me i figured it would be a normie kinda party out girl buy me this and that so i gave her a chance and it turns out that she is a really kinky mothafucker and happens to be really submissive, after talking and hanging out and doing some stuff, we have trust each other so much it's to the point both of us have established a dom sub relationship automatically, she see the how kind and handsome and was and promises that she would take care of me and love me so much that she pretty much gave her whole trust and submissive to me.

I find it strange that i went from being a lone, stuck in a rut 21 year old, watches hentai, plays video game, have a good job and just don't knowing how to drive, to now being in a loving Daddy/little girl sub /om relationship. We just clicked and just knew we got so lost into the moments that it scares me that when i think of love, i'm supposed to feel butterfly and shit.

>>137053916
>OP here
lurk more

Women are too much like children as it is, I don't want them calling me daddy and pretending to be a little girl. That is unhealthy and cringe-worthy.

>>137050920
Women have always been the submissive gender, while men the dominant. Kind of like >>137051069 said. It's in their nature.
In fact, it's a big reason why males are attracted to females (aside from the obvious physical appeal). Their submissiveness is cute and charming.

On a side note, I never understood why some guys don't like clingy girls. The fuck is the problem with your girl showing affection to you and depending on you for everything? I guess they're one of those people who actually like dominant (bitchy) women.

>>137050920
Relationships should be Dom/sub based, but not every relationship should have the woman as sub by default. There are a lot of man cucks that don't deserve to be dominant.

File: AutismFox.png (316KB, 452x520px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 452x520px

>>137051069
>very normal/healthy relationship is dom/sub

This.

>>137051069
What about gay relationships

>>137056320

degeneracy

>>137056607
Wouldnt two gay people being in a relationship at least just be better than gay people whoring themself out at random glory holes and getting aids

>>137056320
GAS

Yes.Submissive to strong woman

>>137056703

sodomy is morally unacceptable regardless

File: 9875932875.jpg (467KB, 1023x800px) Image search: [Google]

467KB, 1023x800px

The ultimate red pill is having a cuckquean relationship.

File: 1501197705969.png (2MB, 960x1024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 960x1024px

>>137050920
The language of BDSM has ruined the discourse on relationships. BDSM uses the terms Sub and Dom in the context of power dynamics and humiliation. In the traditional context, these words mean something very different. When the bible says women need to submit to their husbands, it isn't saying they need to debase or humiliate themselves before them. The whole strong independent woman who don't need no man meme that's contributing to the destruction of modern women is a reaction against this incorrect meaning of submission.

The proper context to frame these terms in is not humiliation and power. It is duty, leadership, or perhaps even entrepreneurship. The point of traditional relationships was to merge two people together into a stronger unit, and have each complement the other, and fill in their weak points. This requires a division of labor and of leadership. And the sexes have different aptitudes within this.

To say that men should lead and women should follow is still framing it as a matter of power and status, as we award more status to leaders. A more accurate framing would be to say that men should navigate. A common metaphor for a relationship is a sailing ship, with the man as captain, and the woman as crew. The captain decides what is to be done, and the crew's concern is to do it properly. But even this isn't quite right. The metaphor breaks, because the proper framing would be that the man is the ship and the woman is the crew.

In other words, the man provides structure and the woman operates within it. Men are naturally inclined to attempt to create structure. Women need structure to fulfill their primary biological role, and thus are psychologically geared to it. This does mean that men lead and women follow, but it is an important distinction.

What I'm trying to get at with all this, is you need to stop viewing relationships through the lens of hedonistic bullshit. It debases and poisons them over time.

Modern women are not submissive, they aren't house makers and are only good for their vagina.

The real redpilled is realizing that women are property, first the property of their father, and then that of the husband their father married them off to.

File: 1501728985972.jpg (260KB, 1280x1280px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 1280x1280px

>>137054796
>On a side note, I never understood why some guys don't like clingy girls. The fuck is the problem with your girl showing affection to you and depending on you for everything? I guess they're one of those people who actually like dominant (bitchy) women.

It is because there are different types of clinginess. If you have a good woman who is clingy because she is nervous or unsure of herself, then over time she will grow, and grow together with you. She will depend on you and you on her. That is a functional relationship, but we'd not really call it clingy.

What people normally mean by clingy is the toxic sort. Their dependence turns into you enabling their poor behavior. Instead of growing, you end up fueling their bad side. They end up vindictive, jealous, and possessive, but they offer almost nothing in return apart from sex. But in time, they will become resentful of that too. This form of female dysfunctional is very common and must be defeated. But men are so desperate to feel wanted and useful that they'll enable it.

>>137053916
>I find it strange that i went from being a lone, stuck in a rut 21 year old, watches hentai, plays video game, have a good job and just don't knowing how to drive, to now being in a loving Daddy/little girl sub /om relationship. We just clicked and just knew we got so lost into the moments that it scares me that when i think of love, i'm supposed to feel butterfly and shit.

Young women these days are suffering from terrible social scripts. They are not growing up. Their relationships are a long string of daddy issues. What you are describing here will not grow into a lasting, loving, healthy relationship. She is using you as some form of surrogate father figure and provider, and paying you back with sex. It is essentially prostitution. Do not enable her to avoid growing up, or you will be stuck with a woman-child. And in time, she will resent you for it and poison the relationship!