I completely agree with the main thrust of this thread, that a person needs to have self respect and self knowledge in order to be interesting and useful as a long-term submissive She needs to value herself and her submission, and needs to feel fulfilled and happy with her actions and her life to be someone who is more than a passing fancy. People who don't have any self-worth should really seek help, professional or otherwise, and work on improving themselves to the point that they feel they can take joy in life.

That said.

I don't necessarily agree that a dominant shouldn't be a "higher class" than his submissive. I work very hard, am quite successful by most measures, and am very ambitious. For a woman to be my "social equal" she would need to either

  • be in the same professional circles as I am, which means she's working very hard and concentrates a lot on her career. I don't really want that, as I want someone who focuses on me, and who feels fulfillment through improving and supporting my life
  • be of a "trophy wife pedigree" which generally means some combination of great schooling, good family, great looks, charity participation, etc. These things all come along with their own baggage, and these people don't necessarily intersect with sweetness and light as much as you might think :P


I'm also totally fine with being "smarter" than a sub. There's a saying: "smart, sexy, sane. Pick two." For me, as a personal choice, I would prefer sexy and sane. YMMV.

If I had a choice between
  • A) a lovely, well-bred "smart, social equal" who could attend professional and social/professional events, was a sparking conversationalist, and who had great connections and networks but had her own career and goals and was as busy as I am "outside the home"
    OR
  • B) an attractive, less well-educated, sweet girl who dedicated her life to improving mine and who served me thoroughly and loyally, but who I couldn't "take out in public" as a partner


I would choose B every time.

As a final note, @Snark, I know what you mean but it's hard to hold that situation entirely against the guy. It's pretty tough to value and cherish someone who values herself around $10, and it sounds like he's at least giving her more respect than she gives herself.

My son's contribution to the conversation:
zzzzzzzzssaazzaaq
q

p.s. - I use dominant/he and submissive/she because I am a straight male dominant, not because I believe that women can't or shouldn't be dominant or that men can't or shouldn't be submissive.