Long time sexless marriage

But views like that are negative. Your perspective is misogynistic, paternalistic and patronising. Frankly, they belong in another century and I do not mean the 20thC.  
I disagree with you that a marriage can’t have two people “leading” simulataneously. A couple can easily live without conflict using communication, listening and consensus which does not require anyone to “lead” -the joint decisions “lead”.

My H had very many faults, but that man viewed me as an equal from the second he set eyes on me and still does, with very good reason. And I also view him as an equal, as I should. Our children witnessed a partnership of equals. My son learned to treat women as an equal and my daughter learned to expect to be valued as an equal. 

When I experienced this sort of wishie washie behavior from a woman on a restaurant selection I went with plan B. That is to head to restaurant that featured a buffet. So they could choose, chicken, beef, fish, all sorts of veggies and numerous deserts. If they can't find something on the buffet lines, then they can go hungry. 

A general view? Who are these people? I think they are likely to be men who wake up with blue balls and not men who wake up receiving a BJ. 

I am going to astonish you. All of us have had this conversation with their H:

me: what would you like for dinner? 
H: anything.
me: Chinese? 
H: I don’t want Chinese. 
me: okay, how about Italian?
H: no, not Italian. 
me: what do you want? 
H: I don’t know. 
me: right, you’re having a bloody kebab. 

See me there? Managing to bumble through with a decision without the benefit of being “led” by a man? And I am also quite capable of arranging a date night without supervision as well. Genius me. 

These conversations are what makes me crazy ....

The dinner talk is something we all do.... what do you want?... no what do you want?..... back and forth..... we settle for the least objectionable and and are frankly living a life where we would just like to eat alone....instead of settling all the time.

what is so hard in just speaking up about dinner/ or anything else we want or need...being honest is freeing.
The marriage is already on the rocks so what are we trying to preserve or save their feelings.

So, your point is that women should be viewed as equal to men, treated as equal to men and also should be led by the man in the family because he is a man.

You need to think about that a bit more. 

Men and women are equal, some are superior to others; the bell curves overlap. I hope this is uncontroversial.

Wives tend to want husbands that are superior in some way. The more areas of superiority they can get, the better. I mean, why not?!
I have yet to hear any woman say that they're interested in guys who are nearly as good as they are.
Inferior men are only identified as such after marriage or breakup.
None seek couplings with a guy beneath them.
I can be disabused of this delusion, if anyone would like to counterpoint.

Wives either succeed at choosing superior men, or convince themselves they had.
If they believe they've picked wisely, it may have a sensible effect of deferring to him for some aspects of marriage

To say husbands and wives are equal is to suggest all women fail at picking men better than themselves and instead choose only peers, all men degrade under marriage, or wives inevitably improve in marriage, or some women pick husbands equally inferior to the superiority of husbands picked by luckier/wiser women.

Is hypergamy a thing? If it is, are the efforts of women to pick prime partners as fathers of their children no better than random chance?
If husbands do tend to be superior to their wives because wives have made deliberate effort to construct marriages like that, is it to be expected that husbands take the lead in more issues in marriage than the wives? Should it be surprising that self-doubt causes more deference and that deference is seen as justified by both parties?

If women regularly and significantly have delusions about who good candidates as husbands are, does that say anything about their qualifications to lead in a marriage?
All my arguments struggle if hypergamy is not a valid phenomenon, so I'll accept that claim.
I think hypergamy is a thing and women, more often than not pick fellas who, on the whole have a bit more going on and it's by design. They want it that way. They know what they are doing and are happy with the results enough to continue.

I'll repeat, the superiority can be merely perceived. By both parties. A guy who is elevated by his wife's admiration is going to have the confidence to believe in himself and his intellect/thought process. He'll have the confidence to lead more often.

It will be frequent that the skillsets of husband and wife are close enough that there should be abundant exchange of views and brainstorming. Difficult decisions may come down to a matter of confidence, and this would nudge the equality over to deference to the husband trained to believe in himself.
A not unsubstantial advantage for wives like this is that they may avoid self-blame if the decision is bad. A husband who consults carefully with his wife should also be okay with failure because the compilation of ideas was acquiesced to, if not agreed upon.
Repeated bad decisions may reverse the dynamic; meaning that the wife should be the tie breaker due to the husband's readjusted sense of confidence. History will win out over self-delusion. Or, at least, it should.