I watched a lady who said that being submissive is not a feminine trait, but masculine, but we’ve been conditioned for centuries to act otherwise.
Her perspective is quite interesting, and I am wondering what your thoughts are about it because I personally have mixed feelings.
- Men submit to stronger men automatically. They’re more disciplined and therefore they do better in the army.
- Women were suppressed by religions, politics and the system purposefully. That’s why we don’t have main religions that allow women to be in charge. It required oppression, taking away our free will, for women to obey.
- Women naturally cooperate, not obey. In a healthy feminine, we don’t compete. We share our resources and energy with others, but the system requires us to submit to men.
- Feminine energy is about expansion, not obedience that locks it in.
When a woman enters her goddess energy, it is not about obeying, but about wanting more. When I went through some goddesses’ archetypes, none of them actually submitted, and now they’re demonised. For example, Lilith was the first who didn’t want to obey Adam, so they made her the mother of demons. Inana never wanted an “equal” god as a partner; she was a goddess of love and war. She chose a shepherd, so religion made her the mother of vampires.
When I think about how Divine Feminine rises and how it affects the masculine-feminine dynamic, it seems like we’re going through a purge. I don’t think anyone should obey but find balance and the role that resonates.
During ancestral healing, I discovered that women in my family ages ago held wealth and ruled, while their husbands were protectors of that. They were leaders, the ones responsible for where the money went and men treated them like a treasure. They were later tortured and eventually wealth was given to men, and even now I struggle to make money on my own, because we have an imprint that “we are not allowed to have more money than men in our family”, while the majority of my male family members seem to be ok.
Even intimacy, when you look at it, how it evolved, now when women step into their power, is different. Dom/sub dynamic, it used to be only men dominating women, while now many men willingly obey women in the bedroom. Of course, porn completely depraves that, and 90% of Dominatrixes should go to therapy because they use it as a form of revenge, but in my experience, men who submitted felt unexplainable relief. Because I talked a lot about kinks with many people, gathering their experiences from a sexology perspective, it made me think that pure insisting on keeping some things only for men and some for women is not really good and that dynamics should be fluid instead of cemented.
Another thing is that, I watched women complaining that they would want old times, where they didn’t have to work, and it was only a man responsibility (a program to submit financially is very deep) and men who don’t want to provide for women because they feel used (mostly because they struggle financially already, so they don’t have resources to provide). I think the “gold” old wasn’t good either. That women should stay at home and raise kids, which is, of course, very rewarding, but again, I noticed that men want to be more present in their kids’ lives, more than ever.
What if the original blueprint is that a woman attracts wealth (provider - because Mother Nature is our provider) and a man protects. What if that role provider and protector was forced on men, taking away women’s ability to create wealth? Men can be nurturing, too. Protection is actually nurturing.
What would happen if men, instead of trying to dominate women and lead, decided to submit and become the shield, while she harnesses the infinite power for them both?
This is not about superiority; it is about allowing energy to flow.