Interesting Research Results
Many who read this web site will be interested in the following extensive 2009 article in the New York Times Magazine by David Bergner, entitled "What Women Want?"
[http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/25/magazine/25desire-t.html?pagewanted=print] The title is a quote of a Sigmund Freud who reportedly said that even after 30 years of study he nor anyone else had an answer to the question "What does woman want?". This article and the research it reports on sheds a lot more light on this question than the involved people want to admit. But in its caution to jump to convenient conjectures, the author and the researchers he focuses on, especially Meredith Chivers and Marta Meana demonstrate high quality. Read it! Since the article does such a good job in being cautious, I can for myself connect the dots to some obvious conclusions.
The stereotype is true: heterosexual men are simple, women are complex. Men desire the female, and they know it and admit it. An erotic female body turns women on more than a casual non-erotic male. But women under-report their arousal measured objectively by their vaginal blood flow. There is a discord between what the woman allows herself to want and what her body wants.
Heterosexual men gaze at the female form and are aroused by it. They do not care to gaze at male physique, but women, both heterosexual and homosexual, are aroused by erotic depictions of both males and females. Even homosexual women are objectively aroused by erotic depiction of males despite their not wanting to admit it. Homosexual males too use inhibition in their brain to turn off arousal by the female, as fMRI studies have shown. Conversely heterosexual men do not care about erotic depiction of males and do not need to suppress anything. So, the man desires the female, the woman is turned on by erotic depictions in general, but what women consciously report belies the clear testimony of their bodies.
Female desire is receptive, turned on by a dominant male's aggressive desire. The post-modern cliché that women's desire is kindled by good relationships is false. “Women’s desire is not relational, it’s narcissistic”. In fact, men may actually be the ones more interested in the intimate connection, in pleasing their woman, while "women’s erotic fantasies center less on giving pleasure and more on getting it." Marta Meana, author of that research, who describes herself as a feminist yet finds political correctness not sexy, says "When it comes to desire women may be far less relational than men.”
With some embarrassment Marta Meana uses the vignette of the woman being ravished by a male in a back alley to make this point. "More than one-half of women have entertained such fantasies, often during intercourse, with at least 1 in 10 women fantasizing about sexual assault at least once per month in a pleasurable way." But it is not the violent (and in my opinion then un-erotic) aspects of rape that hits the button, but the idea of the woman's forced submission under the desire of a dominant man taking her into his hands.
In conclusion, the research clearly shows that while most women are culturally or biologically disposed to suppress the testimony of their bodies, most women with a sex drive desire to be taken in hand by a good dominant man who is a strong provider, who desires her madly. Conversely the desire of women is turned off by her man's dependence on her, or by the notion of him being trapped in his commitment to her.
I certainly find the great enigmas in my life explained by these scientific insights. Many women here on Taken In Hand give testimony to this truth that they have discovered for themselves. They are to be admired for being connected to themselves more than those who suppress their desires and instead hold on to false notions of women's sexuality being governed by relational factors. This article is a great gentle wake-up call for many men, like I was, who dis-please their women by obeying what they say instead of pleasing her by nourishing their innate male desire for her and dominance over her, while being a good caring provider, a good man.
- Login to post comments
#1 Long, but worth reading...
From the article:
"A symbolic scene ran through Meana’s talk of female lust: a woman pinned against an alley wall, being ravished. Here, in Meana’s vision, was an emblem of female heat. The ravisher is so overcome by a craving focused on this particular woman that he cannot contain himself; he transgresses societal codes in order to seize her, and she, feeling herself to be the unique object of his desire, is electrified by her own reactive charge and surrenders."
At the heart of it, I think men and women want the same thing, to be desired, deeply and passionately desired by their partner. The woman wants her man to desire her so much that he is unable to resist the urge to take her and ravish her, he wants her to desire him so much that she ssurrenders her body, her heart and her life to his pleasure and happily submits to his forcefully taking her.
I wish society celebrated that kind of passion more rather than the very professor discussing it apologizing for "the regressive, anti-feminist sound of the scene".
#2 One man's(or woman's) burden can be another's fantasy
As we have begun our Taken In Hand journey, the innate differences between man and woman have become so apparent.
One of the biggest mistakes we, ourselves have made is assuming that our mate would respond the same way we would when put in a certain situation. We do this because we are empathetic and don't want to do something that our mate may find uncomfortable, but when we unknowingly bring our innate gender biases into the equation we end up making false assumptions that can trip up the relationship.
Since we started exploring a taken In Hand relationship, we have talked and talked so much. And in that talking discovered so many differences between what we thought the other person wanted and what they truly want. We just made assumptions based on what WE would think and feel in that situation.
You could argue that it is not a gender difference but just a personal difference. And that might be true. But for us, the differences seem to follow a basic gender guide.
For example, when I have so much responsibility for our family on my shoulders, I feel overwhelmed and stressed, not to mention resentful. When my husband feels the responsibility for our family on his shoulders he feels strong and capable. It feeds his feeling of being able to care for his family and his feeling of nurturing. Or when we bring up the idea of being told what to do. I love the idea that he would be so interested and concerned that he would want to make certain demands of me. It makes me feel taken care of and loved. But he HATES to be told what to do and just gets really angry about it. In both of these instances, if we simply put ourselves in the situation and determined what our reaction to it would be, and then assumed that our mate would have the same reaction, we would be so wrong. And would most likely not be able to fulfill their needs and desires.
This has been one of our biggest learnings from our exploration of Taken In Hand.
If we can, despite society's pressure against it, try to keep (and celebrate) the differences between men and women at the top of our minds, we will probably be a lot more successful at pleasing both parties.
#3 Nice Article
I really enjoyed this article. It explains a lot for me. It explains the 'why' of the feelings I have and the reasons I want this relationship with my husband. Thanks for posting.
#4 Agree Completely!
I so agree with your comments. One of the things we have been struggling with of late is that my husband "thinks" he knows what I want - and his radar seems to be off. Hopefully this is just a temporary blip... but it is a blip. Glad you & your husband are finding happiness as you travel this journey.