Any country has clear rules. They are called laws. They were established once and usually apply in perpetuity. It is no different in a classic dominant relationship. Here, the master alone determines what is allowed and what is forbidden. He also determines the punishment for breaking one of his laws. He ensures clear conditions and a clear order in the area for which he is responsible.

However, a far-sighted landlord would do well to lay down these rules – his laws – right from the start. If he intends to marry the woman of his choice, then she must know very clearly what she is agreeing to with him. She must know that she is submitting to his rule and will no longer have all the freedoms she may have previously enjoyed.

Getting involved with a dominant man has very clear consequences for a woman. He will definitely not be the softy who carries her on his hands and understands all her feminine whims. No, he will rule over her and clearly define what she can and cannot do, what she must and must not do. He will undoubtedly also impose sanctions if she does not follow his instructions. And he will reserve the right to punish her if she refuses to obey him.

But what a real man of the house must avoid at all costs is inconsistency. The woman must be able to rely on him. She must know that he is true to his word in every respect. She must be able to firmly assume that his yes is just as valid as his no and that he will not go back on a decision once it has been made. This is exactly where she gets the security and reliability that she values in him and this is exactly where the trust and security that she feels under his leadership comes from.

That is exactly the quality that makes her feel attracted to him. That’s exactly what she expects and that’s what he has to guarantee her.

It simply must not happen that he lets something pass today that suddenly results in a harsh reprimand or even serious consequences tomorrow. She would immediately interpret that as weakness and a real man of the house simply cannot afford to be weak. After all, she loves him because she feels safe around him. She doesn’t appreciate him for his infinite understanding, but for his toughness. That’s exactly what she expects from a real man and that’s exactly what he has to show her. Consistently and without ifs and buts.

If he has married her, then he has entered into a contract with her. However, the details of this contract are dictated by the state and are rarely in the man’s favor. But if he has made her his wife, this has consequences that go deep into the relationship. Deeper than all the clauses that the state marriage contract entails. Because there is always a power structure between husband and wife. The law may talk about equal rights. In practice, however, the law of the strongest applies and in the case of a dominant man, this will certainly not be the woman.

He will therefore lay down his own laws. He will ensure that the relationship runs according to his rules right from the start. Incidentally, this applies not only to the classic formal marriage, but also to any other type of relationship. He has established a life partnership with her. He will lead, guide and dominate her. He will ensure that their life together runs according to his rules. And he should agree this with her privately and just as bindingly before the official signing at the registrar’s office.

In the 19th century (and up until the 1950s), such a contract would have been completely superfluous. Back then, the term „head of the household“ still had a very real meaning. Back then, it was quite naturally the man who set the rules in the marriage. If his wife wanted to pursue her own work, he had to give his consent in writing. In fact, her place was at home, where her job was to look after the children and make sure her husband had everything he could possibly want. The term dominance didn’t even exist back then, because back then every man was dominant and if he wasn’t, he was considered a weakling who was under her slipper.

Back then, it wasn’t just the master of the house who decided what was allowed and what was forbidden in his home. Back then, he also had the natural right to chastise his wife and children if they defied his law. Every marriage or family had a cane or leather strap for this purpose and it was clear who was in charge and who was expected to submit. Because without power there is no power, as everyone was aware in those days, and if a man doesn’t strike occasionally, no one will take him seriously in the long run.

In the vast majority of countries around the world, this principle has not changed to this day. Only in some countries in the western world did men at some point in the not too distant past think they had to give in to the emancipationists and introduce unrestricted equality. A decision that has backfired on us today and has brought neither women nor men any advantages.

In the past, a man took it for granted that he would offer the woman he loved the security of a lifelong marriage. He knew that she was the weaker one emotionally and economically and therefore felt responsible for her. In return, he was the man of the house and naturally received her unconditional support in all situations. According to today’s laws, marriage is above all an economic risk for him. He therefore thinks twice about whether he really wants to get involved. After all, divorce is easier today than ever before and he usually has to bear all the costs.

The result is that there are more and more relationships that would previously have been described as „wild marriages“. Relationships that can easily be dissolved at any time and offer both partners neither economic nor emotional security. Children are not likely to be born under such shaky conditions. At most, Muslim women still do that. They do get a beating at home if they don’t parry. But they are also unfamiliar with divorce and know that they will be looked after for the rest of their lives.

So freedom also has its pitfalls.