*Rigid Complementarity, Competive Symmetry, Submissive Symmetry*

Rigid complementarity, Competitive Symmetry, Submissive Symmetry; there definitions are real interesting to read and yet there are truth in all three definitions. I've played in both roles before, as the dominant or non-dominant person. From experience, I've found Rigid Complementarity to be the most difficult to change. In one of my first relationships, the guy was super sweet and would bend over backwards for me. Although it was cute during the honeymoon stage, it began to get annoying after awhile. And I began to give him tasks to take on and take charge, although he failed at simple tasks and couldn't take the leader role. So therefore, I resented him and ran away from him. The most damaging would be Competitive Symmetry, I haven't experienced being in a relationship like this one. Although I can imagine all the fighting and trying to have the upper hand would get annoying. I'm sure I've been on dates with people like this before, although it seemed to be too much ego in one relationship, so it didn't last so long. As far as Submissive Symmetry, because I'm a leader type overall, I haven't experienced this before. I would get annoyed fast and decide on a location or a place to eat. I'm independent, so I'd do my own thing whether the person was going or not. The most damaging to the self- esteem, or at least mine would be, Rigid Complementarity; because I have a high hope for someone that they can take charge and follow through with their plans. Although, after time, its like trail and error, and I'm just disappointed and bummed all my time spent on trying to "change" the person's role, doesn't work.