SUBMISSIVE?

With her new book, My Foot Is Too Big For The Glass Slipper, Gabby Reece has created a stir about a woman’s role in marriage.  She managed this with one word:  submissive.  As a fan of Gabby, I was initially very disappointed.  Did she truly mean “submissive?”  She is a strong, successful woman with a thriving family and career.  She declares herself “the opposite of subservient,” yet she busts out this ugly word. 

Clearly, her choice of words was poor.  Her idea, I hope, is more about the concept of a woman’s wholeness.  A woman can be a powerful, competitive charger; and she can also be kind, compassionate, loving and giving.   I do not accept that a woman should be submissive.  I do, though, believe that a healthy relationship must include both people giving themselves to each other—giving in balance and in love. 

To do anything, one must first be balanced.   A balanced woman is one who is aware of her wholeness.  Being whole is acknowledging one’s spectrum of qualities and capabilities.  For example, we are not whole if we only know our strengths and weaknesses.  What about everything in between strongest and weakest?   Knowing we are whole means being able to be fierce in competition, yet tender in love.  Being whole is taking and giving.   If you give or take too much or too little—if you are submissive or dominating—you lose your individual balance.  In addition to individual partners being balanced, the relationship between two people must also be balanced, with both people giving and taking with love and respect for themselves and for one another. 

Perhaps exposing her vulnerabilities and submitting herself to love is what Gabby was trying to convey.  Love is all about giving, opening, embracing and serving; and it is unequivocally not about obeying, dominating, being submissive or subservient.