Leading and Supportive Love: The Truth About Dominant and Submissive Relationships

This book is very much an attempt to make power exchange sound squeaky clean and wholesome. I don't fault the book for not talking about kinky sex as that is a complex topic in its own right and trying to sufficiently cover both that and how to build a successful power exchange relationship that functions on a daily basis is just too much information to cover in detail in one book. However, the problem comes in when the author avoids mentioning any of the harder aspects of possible power exchange relationship structures and even attempting to dismiss them by saying that people who claim they are unequal, have forfeited rights etc. in their relationship are just wrong, which sounds condescending to the people the author claims to be defending. Even the concept of punishment is only addressed in the most indirect and sanitized of ways. It's so vague and euphemistic that if you don't already know to look for it, you'd miss it. Also the "real life" example given is pretty bizzare and unethical in that it involves the s-type imposing consequences aimed at behavior modification on their partner as an ultimatum with no prior consent or negotiation. While not all power exchange relationships have a punishment dynamic, it's enough of a common and misunderstood/sterotypical part of the lifestyle that addressing it in this way seems disingenuous. Then there is the whole idea of "leading" and "supporting" in general. These are terms that the author invented to avoid using common accepted terms like m-type, dominant, or submissive because these terms are strongly associated with the "icky" parts of BDSM that the author wants to detach power exchange from. A large part of the book is also spent beating with a hammer over and over the fact that both partners are equal (whether they want to be or not), S-types are not weak, and the partners mutual serve each other, to which all I can say is "doth protest too much." These kind of attempts at "sanitization" are problematic because it make it seems like people who DO practice the more traditional or harder aspects of power exchange are even more deviant and stigmatized.

Apart from that, the book is cringy in how generic and stereotyping it is. For example there are lists of "traits" for the M-type and S-type (I refuse to use the new squeaky clean terminology). The S-type list has a bunch of traits related to being laid back, sociable, open to change etc. which completely rules out people, like my boyfriend, who have autism (as well as anyone with a host of other issues and qualities although I can assure you that there are plenty of s-types who have them). The author is also really big on the fact that "if you know what to look for" you can spot an s-type or m-type from miles away, based again on a host of stereotypes, for example, telling the story of a woman who rejected a man for not being dominant enough because he asked for permission to call her. Say what?!?! Most dominates, at least experienced and ethical dominants are very scrupulous about asking permission for things...at least until they negotiate what they don't need to ask permission for. If you talk to submissives in the, gasp, BDSM community, many will say a dominant NOT asking for permission in the early stages of the relationship is a red flag. In fact, while the author pays lip service to openness and negotiation (in all of two pages...maybe) many of the examples in the book involve the people involved making assumptions or attempting to use the other person's "l/s traits" to manipulate them. It also pushes the idea that m-types and s-types are genetically hardwired, unchangeable, and pairing up with anyone other than your polar opposite is extremely likely to fail and will certainly cause massive misery, when, for many people, dominance and submission is a continuum and they can fall any number of places on it or they can move back and forth on it, or be at different points on it in relation to different activities or situations. Also, to a certain extent these relationship roles are skills that can be learned if that is what one wants or what is needed to compliment a partner. My boyfriend needs more support and guidance than I expected at first and I have had to learn how to be an effective leader to answer that need and I've also heard many submissives talk about how, although they want to submit at least in their mind, when it comes time to do so, their natural self-interest gets in the way and they have to learn the skill of setting it aside to fulfill their role in the relationship. So, instead of writing off someone of the "wrong type" as hopeless as the author seems to suggest, these might be situations to implement that negotiation that the book hypes but never really shows in action.

In addition, the book doesn't really provide any concrete suggestions regarding how to navigate a power exchange relationship, sidestepping the issue by claiming it's purpose is "not to provide therapy." Providing concrete, practical, and actionable suggestions is not therapy. The book does not get any more specific than "communicate more" which leaves it's central point as "power exchange relationships exist" which is a pretty lame premise for a book. If you want to get a more specific and accurate idea about how to build a power exchange relationship, as well as see a working example of an incredibly devoted, successful, and synergistic power exchange relationship (where the S-type has autism and doesn't fit most of this author's traits no less) I recommend anything (not just books but presentations and stuff too) from Raven Kaldera and Joshua Tenpenny, especially "Real Service" and "Building the Team." These books certainly don't provide therapy but, nonetheless provide oodles of concrete suggestions for how people can make their power exchange run smoothly and better tailor it to suit their needs.

I found it interesting and helpful but I didn't agree with the Dom and sub descriptions. I found it an unfortunate to educate other's with these closed views. I've met so many different types of Doms and subs with varied dynamics and this book didn't give you the broad view. If you're looking to figure out if you're a Dom or a sub don't look here it'll confuse you. If you would like inspiration on how to have a healthy D/s relationship, this helps. It gives inspiration, but is by no means a bible to stick to. I was disappointed with this book but it is an interesting read.

This would be a good book for those who know very little about authority based relationships, hierarchical relationships, power exchange relationships, Dominant/submissive relationships, etc. But for those who are familiar, this book is too basic. I gave it three stars only because it was way too basic for me personally, but a newbie might very well give it more.

A great read, I owned this book before but lent it to a friend and didn't get it back so I bought another one - I can't recommend it highly enough.

I received the book today, and finished it today. It is an easy read, but provided some amazing insights to some longstanding relationship issues. I would recommend it to anyone questioning their role in, and goals in, a L-S relationship

Amazing book for ANY couple at any stage!

Fascinating book. Very helpful and enjoyable. I was quite surprised.

Great book for a couple who want more than a vanilla relationship. Someone starting out. The information was thought provocating

As a submissive I like to read all the literature I can and see what I can learn from and grow from and what I connect with. Normally those books tend to be from other submissives. I have to say this might be the first book written from a dominant standpoint on all aspects of a leading/supporting relationship that I connect with and just have read and reread. Then my leading partner read it as well and he loved it.

a little vanilla.. came highly reccomended but no real deep philosophy or new insights. kinda boring finally..maybe for church people or convincing your parents BDSM is a good thing?? supposed to b a classic?smh