Dominance

The dominant man is inclined to be someone with well formed opinions. He likes things done in a certain way. It stands to reason. I am casting my mind's eye over the dominants I know, in person and by their words, and none of them are short of an opinion. The submissive woman in his life comes to know these opinions well. Unafraid to air them, the dominant man informs his girl of how he would like their home to look, how he would like her to behave, how he would like her to dress. Many of them have particular tastes in flowers, in food, in cars, and decor.

So, if one follows this line of thought to its logical conclusion, could dominant men be snobs? In order to determine some kind of answer to this question, a definition is required:

"One who tends to patronize, rebuff, or ignore people regarded as social inferiors and imitate, admire, or seek association with people regarded as social superiors.
One who affects an offensive air of self-satisfied superiority in matters of taste or intellect."

I can only speak for myself when I say that the word 'snob' has a negative connotation. It would hurt me to be called a snob, for example. The words "rebuff or ignore people regarded as social inferiors" actually offends me.

In life's social order, there will almost always be someone above us or below us. There will always be someone more intelligent or less intelligent. There will always be someone with more money or less money. This should be of no concern to us, as far as I am concerned. Life has dealt us a certain hand and we must play it as best we can. Fortunately, happiness has little consideration for money, or station in life; for possessions or even for beauty. Happiness can be found in the most unexpected places.

So, what about "seeking association with people regarded as social superiors"?

Realistically, the dominant man is likely to do this, to at least some extent. Wanting to dominate his landscape, he may need to seek out people of power, people of influence. I believe the term for this is 'networking'. It is just part of life and part of the dominant's life. But, does the dominant man seek out "social superiors" as his friends, to the exclusions of others? It is a generalization I am not prepared to make either way. I just don't know.

And having said that, one must ponder, does the dominant man "affect an offensive air of self-superiority in matters of taste and superiority"? Probably, would be my answer. He is likely to have well honed thoughts about the way things should be. He may look down on another man whose dress is not suitable for the board room. He may consider his secretary inappropriately dressed if she is wearing pants rather than a skirt. He may deplore the bright nail polish he sees on a girl in the street, and physically cringe at the ring in her lip. He has standards and he disapproves of those who do not meet those standards. I think that this is a fair statement but again, generalisations are just so tricky. We are all inclined to hold opinions about others, whether we air them or not.

Since generalisations are just so tricky, let's take an example. Let's take my boss of yesteryear. He was definitely a dominant man. Self-made, he used his formidable social skills, hard work ethic, and determination to make his way to the top of his industry. Was he a snob? Based on the above definition, yes he was. He did seek out people at the top of the social pecking order, and he did look down on certain people as being ordinary or average. He did have particular tastes and he did have a "self satisfied superiority" about those tastes. Was he good man? Yes, he was. He had a particularly soft spot for women and I remember once the wife of a man who had been sacked, coming to see him. She laid out her case for more compensation and whilst he didn't have to, he increased that compensation. As he watched her through the window return to her car, he said something like:

"There she goes. She got all dressed up in her best clothes to come and see me. She swallowed her pride, and she came to do what he could not do. How could I say no?"

He felt for her as he felt for so many.

One day, he fell very ill in the street. It was his heart and he was in real trouble. A blind man approached him and asked his help to cross the street. He told me, "As I became his eyes, it was the support of his body that got me across the street." The rich man and the poor man were acting in concert.

He never lost sight of the fact that we are all just people, doing our best. He never lost the vision of his mother, trying to bring up her children with next to no money; her efforts to do so with pride and grace. Sure, he revered those who had 'made it', sought their company and enjoyed their intelligent conversation, but he never lost 'the common touch'. He was, without a shadow of a doubt, a dominant man. He had some snobbish ways, but his heart was good.

Dominant men are the aggressors in life. They are pro-active in their environment; not passive. They assert themselves.

In my efforts to think through this thought, I spoke with my husband. There is not a shadow of a doubt in my mind that he is a dominant man, also. He said, that dominant men are quite naturally, more likely to reach leadership positions. Yet, it was those men who were able to span all socio-economic groups without passing judgement that he admired. Maybe a man had been smarter or luckier than him, but that didn't make him better than others. He shook his hand with the same ease that he shook the hand of the humblest worker.

Now, if a girl on the end of the telephone decides to get snooty and unco-operative on the other end of the phone, trust me, he won't be so generous. Arrogance will prevail as he gives her a good dressing down as to what her job is - to serve the customer. And, if I should choose to not dress appropriately to attend an event, I can assure you his "self satisfied superiority in matters of taste" would prevail. Similarly, if I should fall short of his "self satisfied superiority in matters of intellect" he would let me know that I should smarten up my footsteps. Is he a snob? I certainly don't so. In fact, I know he is not.

Perhaps submissive women have come to expect a little arrogance in their dominant man. No woman wants a 'wimp'. Let's call a spade a spade. Yet, a little humility and grace goes a long way, too.

I believe in standards; traditions, structures and expectations. Someone has to lead; someone has to set the tone. At the end of the day, perhaps 'arrogance' is just 'part of the deal' of a dominant man. Humility, the 'common touch', is desired. At journey's end, we all go to the same place.