Power exchange is not power lost. It's power redirected, deliberately, by someone who still has plenty of it left over everywhere else in his life.
The most common misunderstanding about power exchange, from people who've never actually experienced it, is that it requires a man who's weak somewhere else. The opposite is usually true. The men who do this well are frequently the ones with the most control in the rest of their lives: running companies, managing large teams, making high-stakes decisions all day. Handing authority to someone else in this specific context isn't a symptom of powerlessness. It's a deliberate, chosen exception to a life otherwise defined by control.
Call it an exchange because that's what it actually is, structurally. He gives up the burden of deciding, in this one domain, and in return receives something he can't generate for himself: the specific relief of being told, rather than having to tell himself, and knowing that someone else is holding the authority to enforce it. That's not a net loss. It's a trade, and like any real trade, both sides are giving something up to get something they value more.
What the person holding the authority gives up is easier to overlook, but it's real. She takes on the responsibility of getting the calibration right: knowing how hard to push, when to hold the line, when to ease off. That's not passive. It's the actual labor of the exchange, and it's why real power exchange dynamics require someone with genuine skill and attention on the authority side, not just someone willing to say no.
The men who understand this distinction, exchange rather than loss, tend to be the ones who last in these dynamics rather than treating it as a novelty that wears off. They're not looking to escape responsibility altogether. They're looking for one place in their life where the responsibility of deciding finally, legitimately, isn't theirs to carry.