The Dreaded S-Word

Just when I’ve grown to think it is okay to use the term submissive to describe part of who I am as a husband, I’ve recently read suggestions in the Venus On Top forum where perhaps a man would be well advised to avoid using the s-word, especially when approaching his wife about her taking leadership of their relationship. It would seem, according to some of the dominant women in the group, that the s-word conjures in the mind of a woman, connotations of a spineless, jellyfish of a man, lacking in self-respect and devoid of the mettle to defend and protect her against that which might harm or dishonor her.

Not that it’s not okay to submit to a woman’s opinion, authority or leadership. Just don’t refer to it as being submissive. Compliant and subordinate have been half-heartedly offered as substitutes. Okay in a pitch I guess, but they don’t quite get the message across. Do they? One dominant woman suggests using the word uxorious. Now there’s a neat word. I like it because it’s a word you don’t hear much these days. But what the hell does it mean?

“Honey, I’ve been thinking that I’d like to be more uxorious.”

“Ux-what? What the hell does that mean?”

“Well, it means being fond of one’s wife.”

“And you’re not fond of me now?”

“Of course I am, but it means being, well, excessively fond of you.”

“Excessive? As in too fond of me?”

“No, I don’t mean it that way.”

“Then why don’t you just say that you mean.”

“I mean…”

“Never mind. I’ll look it up for myself.

Uxorious: Having or showing an excessive or submissive fondness for one’s wife.

“Oh, I see. In other words, you want to be submissive to me.”

I think it’s interesting the dictionary uses the word submissive to help define the meaning of uxorious. Damn s-word. Okay, let’s pretend the definition is simply: excessive fondness. Hmmm, exactly how much fondness for one’s wife is “excessive?” Can a man ever be too fond of his wife? And what about that female authority and leadership thing. Where in the definition of uxorious does it mention yielding or sub… oops, I mean acquiescing to a wife’s authority?

Submissive: (one definition) ready to conform to the will or authority of another

Submit: accept or yield to a superior force or to the authority or will of another person

It seems to me that you may use whatever euphemism you wish, but the s-word hits the nail on the head more squarely than any other. It does for me anyway. I am submissive to Goddess V. I want and like to submit to her authority. BUT, and this is where I think some people get too caught up in the semantics of our language, this is not the only word that describes who I am as a man. First off, my submissive nature largely extends to one person only, the woman I love (walk up to me and tell me to kiss your ass and see what kind of reaction you get). Secondly, there are many other facets and qualities that comprise my personality. Obviously this is true for every man. No one word, be it the s-word or one of a thousand other words, can fully describe who a man is, as a person, as a husband, as a father.


Anonymous said...

I'm glad this change is taking place because so far, this journey of figuring out why my sexuality is so different hasn't been challenging enough.

I don't think the S word will ever be a problem with predisposed dominant women, because they already know they're looking for a submissive male in the first place. The only place where the S word becomes frightening is when a submissive male shares this information with his vanilla wife. Being afraid to use the term submissive when trying to convert a vanilla woman into a dominant one is a small obstacle compared to what lies ahead.

The obvious mismatch in sexualities is a far bigger fish to fry than worrying about the words we use to describe it.

Richard said...

Might be best for a guy to say he'd like her to be more assertive rather than he wants to be more submissive.

Barbara said...

I would go along with richard as far as terms "submissive/slave" etc. are concerned.
I'd rather consider us sexually superior, because nature has equipped us with natural powers that men don't have. We posses ingredients that men desperately need, crave and long for, much more than we do need them.
This simply does create an imbalance which makes us sexually powerful and superior ( provided we are not being oppressed ! ).
However as human beings I find that we are all equal and I treat my man as well as such.
I would never call him slave or any other insulting names.
He may be submissive to womanhood, having recongised female sexual superiority, but still I much rather consider him a "well trained gentleman" or my "knight in shining armour", who is willing and happy to suffer for his Queen's happiness, pleasure and satisfaction.
It is much more down to worship and adoration, rather than enslavement !
He is my hero, even though I have to admit that he is totally "pussy whipped" and willing to endure anything for my pleasure, but this as a proof of his love and adoration for me and not as a submissive slave !

helpmate hubby said...

i couldn't agree more with your sentiments V's knight.

Queen'sKnight1 said...

The Jan. issue of Marie Claire magazine has an entire section of articles regarding Alpha Females some of whom are married to beta males. It is interesting that some of these beta males are lazy and unhelpful while others are strong yet supporters of the woman who leads the relationship.

I think anyone who enjoys this blog would find these articles intriguing.

oldbear said...

First off VK, I am sorry for the recent death in your family, and wish you and Goddess V many years of full-tilt happiness and exploration together!

As for this post, Well said VK! All of it! Especially the end piece.

Barbara, the way you described your relationship was beautiful!

I LOVE your analysis of feminine power! Romance to you and for you must be a lot of fun and deeply rewarding to your hubby!

Txdwcr said...

Here's the thing... submission sometimes brings connotations of one being inferior to another; rather than a lifestyle choice based upon willing acquiescence.

I think the term "Acquiescent Male" is far more descriptive of the true nature of such relationships... a willing choice, someone who is compliant to another's lead or will. A slave has no choice...

Anonymous said...

I'm the person that first introduced the term 'uxorious' to the vot forum. I don't like the term submissive because I do believe it has a negative connotation. For example, my wife has told me she doesn't want a submisive husband. She wants a real man. In other words, submissive is confused with 'wimp'. Maybe the word compliant is better.

But, overall I really do prefer the term 'uxorious'. For one thing, it has a mysteriousness about it, and is a somewhat erotic sounding word. Also, if more and more peoople in the FLR movement use the word, my hope is that it will become synonomous with something positive in a relationship. I dream for the day when all men aspire to be uxorious...


steve said...

I'm looking forward to reading your blogs, anonymous: