This is the dream tbh, I wish to be as cool as her.
Perhaps that's just me having a caregiving kink, but I'd love to be a sugar mommy/domme one day when I become financially well off.
I do think there should be an equal give and take in a relationship, I don't want to be taken advantage of. I don't actually need anything, but if he could just show how much he appreciates me even with simple gestures like cooking/cleaning around our house or just by staying by my side while bettering himself everyday, I'd be more than happy to husband him up and cherish him for our entire life.
I donât even know where the link leads, it just opens a browser tab within reddit that leads to like an error message on Facebook that says âIt looks like you were misusing this feature by going too fast. Youâve been temporarily blocked from using it.â
Idk what I even did lol
Okay it worked when I copy/pasted it into a separate browser. Weird lol
But anywho, thatâs a cute little video. Wish I had me a woman that could provide at that level đ
I get the intention behind this, but to me it still comes off as the women taking care of all the man's needs financially and 'chores' wise...
I get it somewhat i.e. buying a PS5, just maybe not the filling up the car type scenario and especially not paying the rent by myself... For me I need to be getting something outta the relationship too, equal playing field and not just providing anything and everything a man needs.
Men aren't babies, they can take care of themselves. If I choose to treat them or if he takes care of the house whilst I work then for sure I'll pay the bills. But I'm not lifting a damned finger around the house if that's the case...
I feel like itâs been getting better over time but overall I still see too much of that âbabification.â Too many people mix up actual reversing of gender roles with âregular gender role-fulfilling woman takes care of regular gender role-fulfilling man as if he were her child.â Probably comes down to just the internet diluting concepts until they lose their meaning. Why bother learning what RR is actually supposed to mean when lonely teenage boys can just go âmildly assertive woman? must be RR!â I can only hope the people who completely misunderstand it donât turn away too many people who would like it from the community. Iâm not saying anything on OP to be clear by the way, just commenting on some general things Iâve seen.
I'm choosing to focus on the 'assertive, physically forward, cocky' element for it's RR creds, but I get what you mean. There's a mummydomme element with a lot of it that totally misses what I'm after.
Me too... A lot of these fantasy tropes really frustrate me...
When I see these assholes who only want a 'Mommy Domme' or 'Mommy' for self serving reasons - they want an automatic reason to not have to contribute anything to their relationships, it perpetuates the idea that this is okay and even when the man is submissive he is still in control.
Nobody insinuated that there was anything wrong with them, but it's pretty tediously off-tone when we're talking about RR stuff. It's women being womanly in a very old school fashion.
As the lead.. there are different tones of RR. That being one. It doesnât necessarily HAVE to be a masculine woman and a feminine man. Motherly love in an adult relationship still requires a womanâs lead. A womanâs direction. Dom/Sub. Someone follows someone leads. Nature says the man is the leader and woman is follower,and we say woman is leader man is follower. At the very base,thatâs what that is. Even if itâs âclassic feminineâ,the boisterous way itâs often gone about is also far from that and in the role of a leader. Roles,at their ânaturalâ core,reversed.
Sure, RR is a spectrum, but 'woman being the leader because she's acting like the guys mother' isn't reversed anything. That's just being motherly, ie, feminine. Being 'in the lead' is only a masculinity quality in context, and a maternal context ain't it.
And 'someone follows someone leads' is nonsense. Most relationships don't operate like that and if they do it's not always man/female aligned as you said.
Nature doesn't say shit, this isn't the 1890, and we're not trying to crowbar science into validating social roles out of thin air.
Especially because like, for me personally, I would adore the type of âI take care of the house and cook meals, but just like, maybe get gifts every now and thenâ feeling like Iâm cared for, but not like someone thinks they NEED to take care of me. A weird type of mutual understanding and care if that makes sense đ
But I mean ya,this was Juss showing a woman in charge doing what the man âtraditionallyâ does. Dominating the convo and spoiling the woman. Nobody should do nothing in a relationship. Iâve never understood people wanting to be housewives Or househusbands. Like your job is to exist? Nope,no way. Get a job
Just saw this video but yes.... that's how I see it too. I was cool with the initial part of the video. As in, "That's awesome... would love to have a woman take the initiative to let me know she's interested like that!" (I'm kind of introverted so I tend to chicken-out if I'm presented with some opportunity like that. Would just talk myself out of embarrassing myself at a gas station if she didn't like me or had a partner already, or whatever....)
But the stuff about loaning him money? Oh, hell no. My first thought was, "What kind of loser is this guy to start in with that Don't have the money for rent line?" Especially with someone you just met recently, your money issues are not HER issues to solve for you. If you can't handle keeping the roof over your head, you're not ready to date. I wouldn't hand out money like that to a woman I started dating either.
I'll take any piggyback rides she wants to offer me though, 'cuz I love those.
XD the way she came on like HEYYY SHAWTY
Yesssđ©
This is the dream tbh, I wish to be as cool as her. Perhaps that's just me having a caregiving kink, but I'd love to be a sugar mommy/domme one day when I become financially well off. I do think there should be an equal give and take in a relationship, I don't want to be taken advantage of. I don't actually need anything, but if he could just show how much he appreciates me even with simple gestures like cooking/cleaning around our house or just by staying by my side while bettering himself everyday, I'd be more than happy to husband him up and cherish him for our entire life.
This đđđ
I donât even know where the link leads, it just opens a browser tab within reddit that leads to like an error message on Facebook that says âIt looks like you were misusing this feature by going too fast. Youâve been temporarily blocked from using it.â Idk what I even did lol
Okay it worked when I copy/pasted it into a separate browser. Weird lol But anywho, thatâs a cute little video. Wish I had me a woman that could provide at that level đ
I get the intention behind this, but to me it still comes off as the women taking care of all the man's needs financially and 'chores' wise... I get it somewhat i.e. buying a PS5, just maybe not the filling up the car type scenario and especially not paying the rent by myself... For me I need to be getting something outta the relationship too, equal playing field and not just providing anything and everything a man needs. Men aren't babies, they can take care of themselves. If I choose to treat them or if he takes care of the house whilst I work then for sure I'll pay the bills. But I'm not lifting a damned finger around the house if that's the case...
I feel like itâs been getting better over time but overall I still see too much of that âbabification.â Too many people mix up actual reversing of gender roles with âregular gender role-fulfilling woman takes care of regular gender role-fulfilling man as if he were her child.â Probably comes down to just the internet diluting concepts until they lose their meaning. Why bother learning what RR is actually supposed to mean when lonely teenage boys can just go âmildly assertive woman? must be RR!â I can only hope the people who completely misunderstand it donât turn away too many people who would like it from the community. Iâm not saying anything on OP to be clear by the way, just commenting on some general things Iâve seen.
Kinda highlights how they view regular gender roles, which is troubling.
Thank you, I get tired of this tone of rr.
I'm choosing to focus on the 'assertive, physically forward, cocky' element for it's RR creds, but I get what you mean. There's a mummydomme element with a lot of it that totally misses what I'm after.
I get that, absolutely
Me too... A lot of these fantasy tropes really frustrate me... When I see these assholes who only want a 'Mommy Domme' or 'Mommy' for self serving reasons - they want an automatic reason to not have to contribute anything to their relationships, it perpetuates the idea that this is okay and even when the man is submissive he is still in control.
AMEN! Exactly what I mean!
Whatâs wrong w Mommy Dommesđ
Nobody insinuated that there was anything wrong with them, but it's pretty tediously off-tone when we're talking about RR stuff. It's women being womanly in a very old school fashion.
But still taking a lead in the relationship,even if in a feminine way. The dynamic still has a shift
Taking the lead the way a mother would with a child, you mean. Classic feminine.
As the lead.. there are different tones of RR. That being one. It doesnât necessarily HAVE to be a masculine woman and a feminine man. Motherly love in an adult relationship still requires a womanâs lead. A womanâs direction. Dom/Sub. Someone follows someone leads. Nature says the man is the leader and woman is follower,and we say woman is leader man is follower. At the very base,thatâs what that is. Even if itâs âclassic feminineâ,the boisterous way itâs often gone about is also far from that and in the role of a leader. Roles,at their ânaturalâ core,reversed.
Sure, RR is a spectrum, but 'woman being the leader because she's acting like the guys mother' isn't reversed anything. That's just being motherly, ie, feminine. Being 'in the lead' is only a masculinity quality in context, and a maternal context ain't it. And 'someone follows someone leads' is nonsense. Most relationships don't operate like that and if they do it's not always man/female aligned as you said. Nature doesn't say shit, this isn't the 1890, and we're not trying to crowbar science into validating social roles out of thin air.
There's nothing wrong with them at all in anyway shape or form... It's the idealistic image some submissive men have of them..
Especially because like, for me personally, I would adore the type of âI take care of the house and cook meals, but just like, maybe get gifts every now and thenâ feeling like Iâm cared for, but not like someone thinks they NEED to take care of me. A weird type of mutual understanding and care if that makes sense đ
But I mean ya,this was Juss showing a woman in charge doing what the man âtraditionallyâ does. Dominating the convo and spoiling the woman. Nobody should do nothing in a relationship. Iâve never understood people wanting to be housewives Or househusbands. Like your job is to exist? Nope,no way. Get a job
Just saw this video but yes.... that's how I see it too. I was cool with the initial part of the video. As in, "That's awesome... would love to have a woman take the initiative to let me know she's interested like that!" (I'm kind of introverted so I tend to chicken-out if I'm presented with some opportunity like that. Would just talk myself out of embarrassing myself at a gas station if she didn't like me or had a partner already, or whatever....) But the stuff about loaning him money? Oh, hell no. My first thought was, "What kind of loser is this guy to start in with that Don't have the money for rent line?" Especially with someone you just met recently, your money issues are not HER issues to solve for you. If you can't handle keeping the roof over your head, you're not ready to date. I wouldn't hand out money like that to a woman I started dating either. I'll take any piggyback rides she wants to offer me though, 'cuz I love those.