Dominance Is About Leadership

Hello everyone. I am offering a new class in July. It's my first couples class. It's a couples retreat. Very excited about this. I feel the material I'm going to be presenting in this class has been brewing in me for a long time. I'm very excited to be presenting this material to people who are ready for it. And it's exciting to note that a lot of people seem ready for it. I put this course on the calendar. I barely marketed it. Barely talked about it. This is the first video I'm making about it. And I already have like the whole bunch of couples enrolled. People are jumping at the chance to have this exploration and receive some guidance in how to create a hierarchical dynamic in their personal lives. This particular course has a very specific direction and focus. It is specifically designed for couples who know clearly that they want the man to be in the dominant and leadership role. And the woman is wanting to be in her more feminine, more submissive role. They know they want this dynamic and they are coming seeking guidance on how to create such a dynamic, how to make it function better to hopefully get some guidance on if they've been attempting such a dynamic in their life, if things are not working. Maybe what the glitches might be. So I'm really excited to offer this class. This is often an area I cover in my private coaching with couples. I feel in a way I've been teaching this class piecemeal to couples and coaching sessions for at least, I don't know, it's just five years if not longer. Giving them the pieces, the modules I'm going to be teaching in this class and helping them figure out their dynamic better. But still there is so much charge around this topic. It seems so fraught. Even the idea of a hierarchical relationship, any hierarchical relationship is fraught with charge and judgment in our times. We're living in a times where entire schools of thought have declared all hierarchy in human relating to be not good. Everything should be egalitarian. This conversation, this dynamic is not that. BDSM is not that relational dumps of dynamics are not that. They are very much based in hierarchy. But as soon as we, excuse me. As soon as we present this idea of hierarchy, especially hierarchy between men and women, especially a hierarchy in which the man is in the leading position and the woman is in the submissive position, it is such an inflammation point in our culture, in our collective conversation. There it almost seems like you mentioned these words, these terms and it's almost like a roar goes off in people's ears and they are not really able to hear anything properly after that. There is such an autoimmune response to even presenting the idea of a dumps of dynamic between, specifically between men and women. Interestingly, it is less chargey to talk about dumps of dynamics in the gay and queer community. There it's actually more accepted somehow. But between a man and a woman, especially a woman submitting to a man, it's a very high trigger point for people. So my desire, my job is to try to the best of my ability to put some bomb on this inflammation response to make it more tangible, to make it a bit more accessible. So this video is a little bit about that. What is interesting I'm finding is that even the people who have already registered for my couple's class, it's so fascinating to watch. People who like know we want this and they've already signed up. They're like, we're coming. And then they start asking their questions. And even in these dedicated people, I can sense how much anxiety and confusion there is around this whole matter. So I'm like, my goodness, I should actually, this, these videos I'm making, they're not just to try and enroll new people into my class. I think they can be useful. Even to the people who know, yep, we want this, we are coming. It would be a good preparation for them. It would be a good alignment for them to get their compass needles pointing in the right directions before they come to class. I think it would be more productive. So I'm going to give you my version of what I think is good and useful and functional in such dynamics. I'm going to outline for you how I approach this field. And my approach is actually very simple. It's very straightforward. It should be easy to understand once I lay it down for you. It should be pretty simple to understand. So the first thing I want to say is I'm really not approaching man-woman relating or dom sub-dynamics or a hierarchical dynamic between a man and a woman from an ideological perspective. I don't have a universal belief that women should submit to men. I am not referring to our holy books, our traditions. I'm not a traditionalist. People think that people who talk about creating a hierarchical dynamic between men and women are living in some fantasy about America in the fifties. I was born in 1970. I have no idea what America in the fifties was like. I don't really care. I'm not emulating it. I'm not referring to it. I'm not referring to any tradition. I'm from India myself. India has had a very incultured, is that the right word? It's had a kind of indoctrinated system of women should submit to their husbands. Women should submit to their husbands. I don't subscribe to it. There are no sheds in my fizzle of philosophy. I'm not referring to any holy books. I'm not referring to any ancient wisdom. I have no old references. I have no old authority. I am not quoting any authority to you or at you. My approach is so, so entirely pragmatic and functional. This is my relationship philosophy and short. You ready? Human beings do what they do out of self-interest. That's pretty much it. That's my starting postulate, if you will. It's a self-evident truth. Human beings act in self-interest. That's my premise. That applies to our relationship decisions. We get into relationships out of self-interest. That is correct. I wholeheartedly approve. Human beings should act in their self-interest and most certainly they should form relationships that are in their self-interest. If I'm choosing to relate with you, it's because it's in my self-interest. If I discover at some point that relating with you is no longer in my self-interest, but perhaps it is even going against my self-interest, I should stop relating with you. Simple as that. That basic principle applies even to egalitarian relationships. It doesn't just apply to polarized relationships. Right? So let's explain that a little bit. What is an egalitarian relationship? An egalitarian relationship is where the two people are equals. There is no DOM, there is no SUB, there is no leader, there is no follower, they are equals. A very simple example and a very big category of egalitarian relationships is friendships. Very important, very beautiful, important category of human relating. Friendships having friends, friends are equals. Friends are in an egalitarian relationship with each other. Even there, the principle of self-interest applies. Who do you want to be friends with? Somebody you like, somebody you enjoy spending time with, somebody who's company you enjoy, somebody who enriches your life, and hopefully they feel the same way about you. You enjoy being their friend, they enjoy having you as their friend, and that's a good place to meet. Two people out of self-interest forming an egalitarian relationship, a friendship, excellent. You may note that when a friendship does fall apart, it usually reaches a point where the self-interest is not being met. You feel you have grown apart from a friend, you feel being with them. No longer feels nourishing. Almost as if the connection has run out of steam. That's how people drift apart. And I think that's perfectly correct. Self-interest, the only principle you need to form good relationships. So people bring so many ideas, so much charge, so many notions, and so much historical burden when anybody proposes the idea of a hierarchical dynamic between a man and a woman, especially if the man is to be in the leading position, the dominant position, and the woman is to be in the followership, submissive position. The whole burden of history seems to just convulsing forward. All the non-concentral domination that has happened from men to women, which is all true, not denying that history, not denying that human beings have non-consensually dominated each other, that men have non-consensually dominated women they have. It's not what we are doing, it's not what I am teaching. I don't think it is what consenting adults who have fallen in love are trying to create in their lives. What you are trying to create is a relationship that fulfills your self-interest. So that's a great distilling point. It would be wonderful if when we come into this inquiry on how can we build a good, a good, damp sub-dynamic between a man and a woman. To keep this cornerstone principle as in focus, is it serving your self-interest? Is it serving both of your self-interest? In which case we would call it a win-win dynamic. If it is serving both of your self-interest, it's a functional relationship. Keep doing what's working, maybe keep trying to improve what is not working, see if you can find a way to make it work so that you can have more win-win with each other, so that you can have more of your self-interest be fulfilled in this dynamic. There are no sheds here, not referring to any traditions, not referring to any guidance from holy books on how men women relating should be done. I don't really care about any of that. I don't. Other people might. I personally don't. I'm a completely practical person. So that's a really clarifying factor. Like, why are you doing this? If you are doing it because it's fulfilling your self-interest, it's working for you. It's working for you, it is more fulfilling for you, it is creating more stability in your life, it is creating more fulfillment in your life, it is creating more affection and love in your life. At every level, it is creating more financial stability in your life, it is creating more erotic fulfillment in your life. You decide, you get to decide, what is the good I am getting from this connection. You make your list of how your self-interest is being fulfilled in this connection. And if you have a good list, you have a good relationship. If you have a very small list or nothing on the list, chances are, that relationship isn't any good. Well, and again, that criteria doesn't really matter whether it's a hierarchical relationship or an egalitarian relationship. Same evaluation would apply to a friendship. I don't really enjoy being with this person anymore. I hardly feel we have anything to talk about. So on and so forth, I don't really enjoy their company. Last two times I've seen it, I keep staring at my watch wanting to get away. Maybe ever friendship as well as its course. I'm not really getting much out of this friendship. Trust that. Serve your self-interest. I think that's healthy. So that's a really big clarifying principle in this very noisy field. Is this relationship serving your self-interest? And when somebody asks you, why would you want a relationship like this? You should have already made very fast answer, which is it's serving me. It is giving me good things. It is enriching my life. It's working for me. It is working for me. You should have a very practical answer for it. Not an ideological answer. At least that's my approach. So that's the first item. And this can clarify things for people. Well, if self-interest is the principle on which we are operating, then it behooves us to serve each other's self-interest, to be of use to each other. And that's a secondary principle. I'm a big fan of. Let's be of use to each other. Let's be of use to men. Let's serve each other. Let's address our partners self-interest. Yeah. And hopefully do it in such a way that we are in a win-win. That you are not addressing your partners fulfillment and happiness at a sacrificial cost. At making yourself miserable. The ideal is the ideally functioning relationship. Not ideal again by any abstract standard or pre-prepared standard. Ideal as in the sense of how can we create a win-win? How can we create a really functional relationship? Is when two people are fulfilling each other's self-interest in such a way that it delights them. It makes them happy. Giving to your partner makes you happy. Making your partner makes you happy. You're not making your partner happy by making yourself miserable. That you're in a win-win with your partner. And that's a successful relationship. Those relationships are sustainable. Those relationships can thrive for years. Those are the couples you look at them and you like what are they doing? How come they're having so much fun? That's the one main concept. The other really big concept, which again I don't think it's on many people's radar often times. Because once again dominance and submission is such a char-ji terminology. But I think it has its uses. I think it is worth keeping. But what is dominance and submission? What exactly are these two positions? So my answer to this is again a very practical and straightforward one. The dominance and submission is primarily about leadership and followership. The DOM leads and the submissive follows. This is the purpose of all hierarchical dynamics. Higher hierarchical dynamics are leadership, followership, dynamics. Between a teacher and a student, teacher is a leader. student is a follower. Right? And if you look at it through that lens, then other things become very clear, which is now you have a very accessible criteria for what it means to be a good DOM. What it means to be a good dominant, both in any category, but because here we are dealing with couple DOM and relationships. In this particular realm, being a good dominant means leading. I'm going to speak in this context with considering this course is about men leading in women following. In this particular case, it's about men leading their women well and men leading their women well erratically. Two really big realms. To DOM your women is to lead your woman well. Conversely, what does it mean to be a good submissive? Is to be a good follower to your dominant man? To be a good submissive to your dominant man? To be a good follower to your man's leadership? That dominant submission is essentially a leadership, followership, dynamic. If you accept this model, things become really, really simple and clear. Let me explain to you, let me try to give you a piece of my mind. Hopefully, I would like to show you how simple things are from my mind. Maybe you won't even come to my class, you will feel this is unnecessary. It's really not that complicated. Every time I'm coaching a couple who is interested in a higher and a higher academic. More and more in the beginning of my I've been teaching BDSM for over 10 years. I've been teaching men and women BDSM for a long time. I've been helping men and women create better eras within the higher academic for a long time. But in recent years, truly the interest in creating is extending that dam sub dynamic to the relational field. As also the interest in it has gone up. I think this is why it's time to teach or retreat in it and really get into it. So whether I'm coaching couples in BDSM or whether I'm coaching couples and how they can have a more thriving functional dam sub dynamic relationally. My perspective, my lens is really straightforward. I really have only two things I look for. How can the man's leadership be better? How can the women's followers should be better? That's it. There are only two things going on. In this particular scenario with the man leading women following again. It doesn't have to be that way. You could have a woman leading, a man following. All of it, I teach all four quadrants just to be clear. In my BDSM fundamentals course, I encourage all students to try on both the dam and the sub archetype. I actually want people to discover what their two joy is. I want women to try dominance. I want women to try submission. I want men to try dominance. I want men to try submission for them to discover where their joy is. But even there, my framework for people is very simple. If a woman learns, my joy is in submission. I'm like, wonderful. Let's guide you in finding a dominant man that you can respect. Let's help you find a dominant man whom you find confident and worthy of your surrender. And then let's teach you how to submit and surrender to such a dumb leadership training, followership training. If a woman discovers she is really good at domin. Usually I invite her to come take my priestess training because I'm like, you're qualified for a very lucrative profession if you want it. You're great when you submit a woman in the world who play a lot of money to be domed by dominant women. Even there when I'm teaching my priestesses, when I'm teaching my pro-dams, I am training them to become good leaders, good leaders of their erotic field in which the submissive men are going to come to surrender to them, to become their followers, to become a dominant woman. And then when they become, there's submissives. Which role do you want to play? Similarly with men, if a man says, I resonate with a dominant position, I'm like, wonderful. Learn to be a good leader. If you're only learning BDSM, then learn to be a good leader erotically in the erotic realm to your submissive because that's what you're saying, that's what you're advertising. When anybody, a man or woman says, I am a dumb, what they're declaring is, I have the competence and the wherewithal to lead you erotically. That's the claim you're making. It is as clear a claim as somebody saying, I'm a doctor. Let's say a general practitioner, which means you can bring me your ills. I'm qualified to examine your ills. But that's the claim you're making. So anytime you say, I'm a leader, anytime you say, I'm a dumb, you're essentially claiming I can lead you erotically in the BDSM realm. It's about leadership and followership. That's at two positions in a hierarchy. There are two positions. And what makes a relationship functional? The two people know how to play their two positions and they're playing them well. When things are not working, swear to you, this is our simple, my model is. Whenever I hear all kind of kerfofo between two couples who are trying to create hierarchy, I only have two questions. How is the man failing at leading? How is the woman failing at following? Let's say within those two categories, there may be thousands of subcategories. But the bigger picture really is as simple as this. There are only two people in this relationship. There are only two positions. Either one or both of them are doing a lousy job occupying their positions. In there are all the breakdowns. My framework is very simple. My job actually is not that complicated. So when the people, if you're thinking of coming to my couple's class, that is going to be my framework. I will ask you what's going on in your relationship. I will listen. Where I can offer you some insights is I have spent a lot of time thinking about what men and women want, what domes and submissives want, what the dom archetypes, what the submissive archetypes. Oftentimes I'm able to illuminate for people the desires they have, which they have not articulated to themselves. And those breakthroughs are very exciting. So this is like the whole model. It's actually not very complicated. Start with self-interest. Do a hierarchical relationship if it fulfills you. And within that, the overall criteria is actually very straightforward. Learn to lead well. Learn to follow well. Learn to dominate well. Learn to submit well. Which is not easy, which is not straightforward. That is a very rich inquiry. But the structure of it, the architecture of it is very non-ideology based. It's a very practical one. And it's a very straightforward one. If you want to use an analogy, I use this analogy to describe. Imagine a dance teacher who teaches ballroom dancing or any kind of partner dancing. What's their job? How complicated is their job? There are two people in this dance. One of them leads. The other one follows. Their steps are complimentary. They fit together, but they're not identical. Right. What is the dancing instructor's job? Make the man better at his steps. Make the woman better at her steps. That's it. Two jobs related, interrelated. There are two people in this dynamic. They're playing complimentary roles, complimentary positions. Dom, sub, leader, follower. Make them better at their jobs. Make them better at their dance steps. And they will dance better. It's pretty much what I'm doing in my classes. In the BDSM realm, I'm guiding people in how to be a good leader erratically in the Dom position and how to be a more gracious and receptive, submissive in the follower position, so that that works. And very parallel in relationships. Leading and following. So the model is simple. The model is straightforward. And the model is very practical. It is not ideology-based. It doesn't come from the holy books. It's metric is functionality. Is this working? Is this making your life better? Are you happier because of this connection? Are you happier because of this type of connection? That's also something really worth clarifying again because we get so lost in the non-consensual burden of history where people have dominated each other non-consensually. That we really need to keep the cornerstone of consent truly in front of us as a reminder all the time. Men and women are not doms and subs inherently. Men and women are sovereign creatures. All human beings are sovereign creatures. You're a sovereign creature first. And then you decide I'm going to play the game of Dom and Sub with this particular human being. I'm going to be the Dom. They're going to be the Sub. They're going to be the Dom. I'm going to be the Sub. I'm going to lead. They're going to follow. They're going to lead. I'm going to follow whichever way you want to go. And then you come and do this particular dance. You do this particular form of relating. You aren't it. You aren't a Dom. You aren't the Sub. Down to your Soul and your Core. You're just a sovereign human being. And then you decide I'm going to do this dance with this particular person, consensually. And it's good to have that clarity too. You're choosing to do this dance. You can stop doing this dance. You can opt out of it. That part is very clear to people when they get proper BDSM training that we always have say ford's. You can always call yellow and stop your scene. You can always call red and end your scene. Even if you don't call red, when your scene ends, you end your Dom subcontract. You're no longer Dom and Sub. You were when you came into this scene. You said, you be the Dom. I'll be the Sub. Let's play this game. And your partner says, yeah, that sounds fun. Let's have this scene. Wonderful idea at the scene. A short episode. So that should give you clarity. Like nobody's making you do anything here. You're not actually following in tradition. In the footsteps of tradition. You are in charge. You are creating your life. You are designing your relationship. And this is a game you're choosing to play. And you can choose to stop playing it. And if you're going to play this game, then some guidance might be useful on how to play this game better. How to down better, how to submit better, how to lead better, how to follow better. So that this game works for you. So that this game serves you. So that this game fulfills your self-interest and your partner's self-interest. So that you create a win-win dynamic that is sustainable. Very practical touchstones, very practical goals for doing this. What else can we say about this? Is it a lot to say about it? The criteria for what makes a good leader. That's a very long conversation. And then understanding our nature, understanding our true desires and how we can actually nourish each other. That is a remarkably rich conversation. All the ways that men can, in fact, fulfill women's self-interest. And all the way that women can, in fact, deeply give men what they're deeply craving from the feminine. I think that's a very rich conversation. And there is plenty to discover there. So that we may actually serve each other better, so that we may be better partners to each other. I think that's an investigation worth making. If you've decided to go on this path, on deciding to be useful to your partner, on deciding that I'm going to serve your self-interest, you're going to self-myself interest in that is what a good partnership is. And self-interest sounds really, so this is another qualification to put in there. Self-interest sounds very basic. Self-interest sounds very first chakra. Like it sounds like we're only dealing with material things. I'm not using it in that way. When I say self-interest, I'm going to include the entire chakra system. If you want to go the secular path, the entire pyramid of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Right. You can say at the erotic level, we are fulfilling each other's sexual self-interest. Fine. I don't know if there's anything wrong with that. But it doesn't stop there. You can go further up to the heart and say, we are also fulfilling our mutual desire for love, for affection, for connection, for warmth. And you can go even higher and say, we are fulfilling our deep need for a spiritual connection, for a spiritual insight. For being in a connection with somebody deep enough that the connection deserves to be called a spiritual connection. That is also our need. Just as Maslow would say, that is a need. He calls all of it needs to simplify it. Your need for food is a need. Your need for safety is a need. And your need to have spiritual and religious peak experiences is also a need. So I include the entire hierarchy of needs when I say self-interest, all of it is self-interest because we have those needs and desires. And we are looking for people in whose company and whose connection those deeper needs as well as the more basic needs might be fulfilled. Right. So it isn't a casual thing and it isn't even just a erotic thing. It's really touching upon our entire spectrum. I wrote down here in this description few things that are needed. What does it mean to be a good dominant? What does it mean to be a good leader? And I've written down three criteria here. I do want to say something else that might be a bit controversial for some people. It's taken me even a while to arrive at the synthesis and just be able to say it unabashedly. Whether in man-woman relating or any kind of relating, but particularly in man-woman relating where men are craving to be in the dominant leadership position, and women are craving to be with men that they can accept and respect as being in the dominant position. You know, we're in a conundrum. Like, how do we feel like we're in a whole? So much is not working in man-woman relating. And there's always inquiry, how can we pull ourselves out of this whole? How can we actually make things work? there seems to be so much failure to lawn. And so this is a scenario that comes to me often where the woman is truly trying to make an effort to make a relationship work. But her man is not leading her well. Her man is not doming her well. Her man is not self-contained. Her man's life is not in place. He may not be doing well in his work and profession. He may not be doing well in his money. And the woman, many of women I speak to, who are like genuinely trying to submit and surrender to this man. And then they're having a very hard time of it. And then they even come to me and say, "Am I not a good enough submissive? I don't know what to do. I don't feel submitted to this man. I don't feel surrendered to this man. I want to be." And I know he's human and I know he's not perfect. And I also encourage women that your submission is your art and your mastery. That part is also true in its own category. But then they're like, "My heart is not in surrender to this man. There's too much on his end that is out of place. There's too much not in place in his leadership. There's too much not in place in his dominance. And I don't know how to surrender to him in spite of those deficiencies. And I think the women are absolutely correct. I have actually stopped telling women to try and surrender to men like that. It's not going to work. It's really not going to work. Women cannot surrender to men. And maybe there's no perfection. But if you're going to work on a scale, let's say a man who's at least 75% there. Let's start with 50%. A man who's at least 50% embodied in his masculinity and his dominance in his leadership. Maybe 15, 15 and 75%. Give the woman something to work with, man. Throw her a bone. Right. At least have some of your basic criteria in place. At least be self-contained. Right. Don't turn to your woman for containment. At least be working on your life. At least be working on your money. At least be working on creating good containment for your woman. At least be 50% there. If you're less than that, I'm like, I can't tell your woman to surrender to you. I'm like, I don't think it's going to work. So my, what I'm saying is that the long and the short of it is. I am really, really going to encourage the men out there to first and foremost become better doms and better leaders. I don't think the women of this world can surrender to second-rate men. And I think that's the whole we're in right now. I think so many women have realized the egalitarian dynamic is not working for me. I would love to have a strong man. I would love to have a man. I respect. I would love to have a man who's lead, who's leadership. I can trust. Whose leadership actually gives me containment. Whose leadership suits me. Whose leadership makes me turn down my vigilance. But the man has to show up. The man has to be that kind of a man. So I think it's a very high criteria to lead as a high criteria, to want to lead as a high goal for anybody, for anybody, mind you. So just to complete the conversation, I am very hard on the women who show up in my priestess program. Women who want to be pro-doms, and my reason is the same. I'm like, if you are going to declare yourself a pro-dom, you are declaring to everybody, but especially the submissive man of the world, that I am qualified to handle your system. I am qualified to lead you erotically. I'm qualified to take you on a journey, a shamanic journey of Katarsis, an erotic expression. That's a big claim. And if you're going to make that claim, make sure you can deliver. You are claiming erotic leadership when you declare yourself a pro-dom. Make sure you can deliver erotic leadership. That's not an easy thing to deliver. You really have to train for it. You really have to do your own work. You have to be qualified. It requires work and qualification. You should hold yourself up to those standards. And that's the same challenge to men who say they want to lead their women are, they say they want their women to submit to them. Not against it at all. I'm not going to judge you for that desire. I think that desire actually is a legitimate one. And it is going to serve the self-interest of a lot of women out there. Lot of women know this is my happy zone. I want to be in submission to a good strong dominant man. But you need to be the good strong dominant man. You need to be the good leader of your woman. That is not an easy task. Being a good leader is not easy. It's not simple. You're going to have to work at it. You're going to have to deliver. And if you don't deliver, if you don't show up in that leadership with integrity and strength and power and embodiment and benevolent power, benevolent power, meaning you really want more and good for your woman, you may even want more for her than she wants for herself. That's what great leaders do. In their leadership, under their leadership, their followers experience expansion in their life. Are you that man? If you're not, let's work on it. Encouraging your woman to submit to you, to surrender to you when you are not that, it doesn't work. It is just creating one more level of misery for women. It is creating a sense of failure in them, which I think is really sad and undeserved. Some women feel they are failing at submission when on the other side, the man that they're trying to submit to is not qualified to leader. He's not leading her well. I will give the man the f, not the woman. So this is my message to the man out there. My sound a little harsh, but I truly mean it from my heart. I really want men to do better. I want men to become better leaders. I want men to understand what it means to be a better leader. I want you to deserve your woman's surrender. Yep, you should deserve her surrender. Then we've got a game. Be that man and then it would be so much easier to guide your woman into going deeper into her gracious submissive, into her gracious feminine. Then there's a good enough template on the other side for her to surrender into. Take away our her excuses on why she can't submit. Be the great leader. Be the good leader. Be the good dam. And then let's take this game to the next level. Then this is a great game to play. But if the men are not embodied in their leadership and their dominance, we have failure to launch. Nothing happens. Nothing happens. The functionality we are trying to create between a man who's embodied in his dominance and a woman who's embodied in her submission. The first piece needs to be the man coming into his embodying. Second piece is the woman seeing her man in his embodiment, responding to it, adjusting her compass to his dominance and finding her complementary energy to his dominance. And that can precipitate, that can come about very quickly. But the opposite to this functional state where the man is all over the place, where his compass is spinning all over the place, he has no direction, he does not have solid leadership, he is not embodied in his dominance. But you are claiming to be the leader. So do you want a leader who's spinning around? Think about it. Do you want to follow a leader who's just spinning around? It doesn't know what direction they want to go into. Who's here one moment there the next moment. To lead the submissive and the follower, their job is to look at the leader, to orient themselves to the leader, to trust the leader's lead, to trust the leader's direction. Which means the leader needs to have a direction. Do you have a direction as a man? Do you have a good direction as a man? Would following you make your woman's life better? Would following you serve your woman's self-interest? Please ask yourself this. If not work on it. You're going to work on it and work couples retreat. You're going to work on it category by category. Which category you are delivering? Which category you're leading well? Which category not so much? So you can kind of see your report card. And then once again, we're going to try and make your dance steps better. And then we're going to try and make your woman's dance steps better so you can do this dance together better. Really, those are the steps for making this work. So I'm going to just read these last three criteria wrote down. Three is a good number always just to make things digestible. Three basic criteria for what a good dominant brings. And remember in this context, the dominant is a relational dominant as well as an erotic dominant recovering both categories. So point number one, the DOM should deserve to lead their submissive. You should deserve to lead your submissive. It should be earned. Your submissive submission, your submissive surrender, should be earned. As precious, women's surrender and submissive is really precious. They should not give it away to anybody. So do you deserve her submission? And how would you deserve it? What would be the qualification for deserving it? For one, have integrity. Be self-contained. Keep your word. Be consistent. Be reliable. These are all about your character. All very traditional virtues for all human beings, but specifically for men. Have integrity. Be self-contained. Keep your word. Be consistent. Be reliable. If you're not even those, do you deserve to lead anybody? Should anybody really follow you? Right? These are not particularly manly criteria. You can apply them across the board, just think in terms of a leader. Would you follow a leader who had no integrity? Would you follow a leader who was not self-contained and frazzled and easily triggered and upset in throwing tantrums? You want a leader who's throwing tantrums? You want a leader who never keeps their word? Do you? As a man, would you follow another man, masculine leader who doesn't keep their word, who's not consistent, who's not reliable? These are leadership criteria. But are you thus as a man? Consistently. Not sometimes, consistently. Because as part of the virtue is being reliable. If you're not even these things, you don't qualify as a leader. You need these basic characteristics, even to be a good erotic leader, even to be just a good dumb and a BDSM scene. You certainly are going to need it if you are claiming that you can lead your woman in your relationship in your life. Second point, a dumb must have mastery to contain their submissive. Yes, because half this course is about erotic leadership and followership. The dumb should have the mastery to handle their submissive's eras. We are talking about intimate relationships here. We're not talking about leadership and followership and work environment. We are talking relationally and erotically. So if you're going to step up and say, "I'm going to be my woman's dumb," or erotic dumb, or dungeon dumb, do you actually have mastery? And handling your woman's eras. It's a big question. It's a big question because women's eras is really big. So be careful before you answer that. Don't answer it casually. You may think you know how to handle your woman's eras. We'll find out how good you actually are. Third criteria, very basic hallmark of why we pick the leaders that we do that under the dumb's leadership, the submissive's life and eras should thrive more fully than it would without the dumb leadership. Your submissive should be better off under your leadership than without it. This is a very high criteria. You hear women say these days and it sounds like a very misandrous thing to say. I don't think it is actually. Women will often say today, "What do I need men for?" Right? I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Why is it a legitimate question? Because women are asking about their self-interest. They should. They're asking why is being with a man in my self-interest. I have my own life. I work. I make money. I have my own house. I have friends. I look good. I'm independent. What do I need a man for? It's an absolutely valid question. And if the woman can't find an answer to it, she is correct. She should not get into a relationship with a man, a pair of bond with a man, a marry a man. Maybe she decides, "Hey, I need men once in a while for some fund and sensuality." That's where I'll meet them. That'll fund and sensuality. And that's it. That's completely legitimate. If that's the only self-interest meeting point, they feel they can have with men. That's absolutely their prerogative to say. I don't see any other good reason to be with men. Absolutely their choice. Right. What are you bringing into their lives? You have the right to ask exactly the same question of all women or any particular woman. How is this woman serving my self-interest? And please remember again, by self-interest, I'm not talking about money and sex. Talking about the whole range. Does this woman move my heart? Does this woman move my spirit? Does this woman move my intellect? Ask at every chakra. Is this woman bringing some richness into my life? Is this man bringing some richness into my life? And if the answer is no, you don't have a good reason to relate to them. But if you're going to say, "I want to be a dominant man. I want to be in relationship with a woman who is submitting to me." Are you bringing enough that it is completely logical and worthwhile for her to submit to you? Is her life at each of those levels better with you than without you? Is it really? Or are you operating in some kind of an entitlement? So you are operating on the premises which I discard. Maybe you are operating on some notion that some holy books have told you, "Women should submit to men." And it is your entitlement that women should submit to you. This is the kind of. psychology I grew up with in India where men felt entitled to their wives submission because it was in the holy books or whatever the hell else that this is the way it's supposed to be wives are supposed to submit to their husbands even if the husband is a douchebag even if the husband is an idiot even if the husband is completely uncontained even if the husband is not contributing anything to his wife even if the husband is composing himself in a way that nobody including his wife respects him but the wife is still supposed to submit to that man no in my book I'm like fuck that bullshit it never worked anywhere it can't work doesn't work anywhere right so we're not relying on any ideologies any traditions we're only relying on self-interest you want to leave your woman is there life better under your leadership ask yourself that if it isn't we got work to do like this is not a easy criteria so I'll leave you with this thought because I had to make this clarification even within the people who have already signed up for this couples course really need to clarify this don't think that in this exploration certainly with me and what happened in life either that anybody's gonna hand you authority simply because you claim you're a dumb right I'm a dumb I want to lead my woman excellent here's her leash no the only way you get your woman's leash if she takes it with both hands and says it'll be my pleasure and pull of a privilege if you would take my leash she gets to decide she gets to decide that you're holding her leash you know the language is getting charged you already I'm getting myself in trouble it doesn't have to be an actual leash it's such an expression but in BDSM play out often is a leash the idea of the submissive submitting to the dominant is a submissive choice is the submissive's offer the submissive offers is our surrender to their dumb why do they offer their sub-surrender it's in their self-interest to do so they're doing it for themselves they're doing it because surrendering to this dumb makes their life better so if you want to be a dumb be that dumb be that dumb that's surrendering to you makes your submissive's life better that's the game we are playing here that's the match we are trying to create that's the that's where we're trying to bring this dance to let's make the doms better at leadership let's make the submissives better at followership and hopefully they can nourish each other be of use to each other at all levels from the physical to the containment to the erotic to the heart to the intellect to celebration to ritual to spirit and that is my idea of the seven chakra marriage which I discuss in my other courses okay I will leave you with that hopefully that was useful hopefully I'll see some of you in my classes please reach out if you have any questions thank you so much