Submission to a Dictator

At a group I often visit, while we were discussing the qualifications of a deacon – namely ‘ruling one’s own house well’ - I keep seeing the word 'dictator' stating the husband should not be one. So, here is my question:

I believe most Christian Bible readers will agree that Christ and the church are the examples set for us concerning the husband and wife. I would also assume that we agree that Christ rules over the church, as the church is to be in full submission to Christ. [Ephesians 5:22-33]

I looked up the word 'dictator' - 'a person exercising absolute power, esp. a ruler who has absolute, unrestricted control in a government without hereditary succession.'

According to this definition, is Christ a 'dictator?' If so, and if the man is to be as Christ in the marriage relationship, what does that make him biblically? Is it not possible to be a 'dictator' (exercising absolute power) while also showing 'love, care, and thought for those following?' This does not mean one cannot listen to his wife's thoughts, but biblically (as Christ is to the church) the husband has the responsibility before God as to making the final decision in all matters. Even if he decides to let the wife make all decisions, he is responsible to God for such. For, would not Christ be yet responsible to God if He were to let the church do as it chooses?

Is it just that the word 'dictator' leaves a bad taste in our mouth, or do we just dislike the idea of one having 'absolute rule over us' kind of like when we rebel against the things of God in our own personal lives?

As one has said, Christ rules perfectly and the church still rebels against Him. It is not always the one ruling who is at fault, often it is us who wish to rebel against the rules.

In asking this question, it was said, ‘you cannot press the analogy completely in the relationships of Christ to the church and the husband to the wife.’ So, I ask, how ‘incompletely’ do we press it?

It has also been said, a husband ‘EARNS her submission by his leadership.' To me, this is like asking, 'Which comes first, the wife submitting or the husband loving?' I mean 1 Peter 3:1-6 speaks of 'ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives,' so it is possible for a wife to be married to one she may not really 'respect' as a leader of the home, but she is still called upon to submit to him. I believe the same is true to loving a wife that 'obeys not the word.'

Question: If a man must EARN his wife's submission, how does the wife EARN his love? Isn't this where we find ourselves in today's society. The husband will not love because his wife will not submit the way he believes she should, and the wife will not submit because her husband doesn't love her the way she believes he should? I do not find 'EARN' in the verses, I only find 'DO IT.'

Wives are commanded to ‘submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.’
Husbands are commanded to ‘love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it.’

Quite possibility we spend too much time thinking ‘she isn’t worth loving’ and ‘he isn’t worth submitting to’ all the while failing to see that it is us rebelling against the very Word of God. For the wife is not commanded to submit if her husband loves her correctly, nor is the husband commanded to love his wife if she submits to him correctly, we are simply told to obey God which has told us to submit and love. No, we husbands and wives are not perfect, but does that really give us justification in disobeying God?