1 Comment

Dominance vs. Domineering

I have often struggled trying to find the words to properly explain to men the difference between dominance and domineering.

In his fascinating book about spiritual enlightenment called “Power vs. Force”, Dr. David Hawkins defined the difference between power and force. I immediately recognized the words as a perfect way to communicate the difference between dominance and domineering.

By taking his description on page 136 of his revised edition, and changing the word Power to Dominance, and the word Force to Domineering, we have a perfect description for the difference between dominance and domineering.

On examination, we’ll see that dominance arises from meaning, it has to do with motive, it has to do with principal. Dominance is always associated with that which supports the significance of life itself. It appeals to that part of human nature that we call Noble, in contrast to domineering, which appeals to that which we call crass. Dominance appeals to what uplifts, dignifies, and ennobles. Domineering must always be justified, whereas dominance requires no justification. Domineering is associated with the partial, Dominance with the whole.

If we analyze the nature of domineering, it becomes readily apparent why it must always succumb to dominance, this is in accordance with one of the basic laws of physics. Because domineering automatically creates counter-domineering, its effect is limited by definition. We could say that domineering is a movement; it goes from here to there (or tries to) against opposition. Dominance on the other hand, is still. It’s like a standing field that doesn’t move. Gravity itself, for instance, doesn’t move against anything. Its dominance moves all objects within its field, but the gravity field itself does not move.

Domineering always moves against something, whereas dominance doesn’t move against anything at all. Domineering is incomplete and therefore has to be fed energy constantly. Dominance is total and complete in itself and requires nothing from outside. It makes no demands; it has no needs. Because domineering has an insatiable appetite, it constantly consumes. Dominance, in contrast, energizes, gives forth, supplies, and supports. Dominance gives life and energy, domineering takes these away. We noticed that dominance is associated with compassion and makes us feel positively about ourselves. Domineering is associated with judgment and makes us feel poorly about ourselves.

Domineering always creates counter-domineering, its effect is to polarize rather than unify. Polarization always implies conflict, its cost, therefore, is always high. Because domineering insights polarization, it inevitably produces a win/lose dichotomy; and because somebody always loses, enemies are created. Constantly faced with enemies, domineering requires constant defense. Defensiveness is invariably costly.

In looking for the source of dominance, we’ve noted that it’s associated with meaning, and this meaning has to do with the significance of life itself. Domineering is concrete, literal, and arguable. It requires proof and support. The sources of dominance, however, are inarguable and aren’t subject to proof. The self-evident isn’t arguable. That health is more important than disease, that life is more important than death, that honor is preferable to dishonor, that faith and trust are preferable to doubt and cynicism, that the constructive is preferable to the destructive – all are self-evident statements not subject proof. Ultimately, the only thing we can say about the source of dominance is that it just “is”.

Give women incredible pleasure,

David Shade


  • 1 Comment


  1. Mr. Disappointed says:


    I am one of your customers and fan for years. I have just about every one of your products except the secrets to erotic hypnosis. I have grown because of your teachings and I thank you for it. You have changed my life for forever and I am truly grateful! I am writing to you because I have a rant. There are very few women who are daddy’s girls and/or high self-esteemed in the world today even when you cross racial and national barriers. Many women I have met do not meet the criteria that are outlined in your teachings. I tend to come across women who are low self-esteem and selfish. I am at a job where there are some females I would date but alas they are connected to this guy who is having sex with them on the job. When I read your books and see the sample emails of frustrated women wanting great sex I often wonder where these females are so I can find them because my orbit desolate. Men aren’t the only ones who do not “get it”; women are in the same boat as a lot of men. There are a lot of men who do the right thing are descent men and a lot of times we attract the wrong women just like some good women attract the wrong men. And there are lots of men who are masterful lovers that have difficult times finding high quality women. I am one of such men. I constantly check my personality and attitude to make sure that I am in the right frame of mind. I pay my bills. I am respectful of women (In a manly way!). I am a very sexual man. Where are the high self-esteem women at? There need to be a strong female leader who can teach other women high self-esteem and sexuality. So that men could have more dating options. I am very discouraged from dating and I am about to give up! I am so bored out my mind and the only thing I have been doing to keep myself from going insane is masturbating to the thought of me giving some woman a vaginal orgasm.

    Mr. Disappointed

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Featured Resources

Members Login

  • Success Stories

  • Recent Blog Posts

  • 7 Lies About Sexuality

  • Free CD Offer!

    How would you like a FREE CD featuring
    the secrets of the
    Masterful Lover?