"No" means "take me"

"No" means "take me"

I only enjoy sex if the man forces me into it, so of course I'm going to say “no” and mean “yes”—or, really “take me!” And I wouldn't mean “try harder” because he will be a big, strong man, more than capable of ravishing me without any real effort on his part. If it takes an effort for him to ravish me, then he's not man enough for me.

Ideally, however, that's only going to happen in an established romantic relationship, not a casual encounter. (Been there, did that, not that interesting any more.) So how do we get the point of him knowing that's what I want? Especially with the feminists incessantly screaming that “No Means No!” and society demanding that we must all follow that dogma?

I'll confess, I really hate having to explain that to him. If you have to ask to be ravished, then it really doesn't count. So I would very much prefer that he's got some intuitive smarts, so he understands me without me having to explain it. I also assume that he will be as turned on by forcing me into sex as I will be, so it should not be a problem. (If he's not turned on by the idea of forcing a woman into sex, then he's not the right man for me.)

Of course, some people will invariably reply that you can't expect all or most men to realize that's what women want, how risky it would be for them to assume that in this day and age, etc. But then, I'm not assuming that all or most men should be able to intuitively pick up on that. I'm not interested in most men anyway, I'm only interested in a very rare and special man who knows what he wants, and who has enough smarts to intuitively understand what his woman wants, too. (And perhaps many other women too. Ravishment is still on top of the list of favorite female sexual fantasies, according to most polls.)

If I have to explain it to him in 12-point font and fill out a signed and dated “Consent to Ravishment” form, then he's almost certainly not the right man for me.

DeeMarie

Taken In Hand Tour start | next

Comments

Communication is more than words

“No”, does not always mean “No”. Sometimes, for some women, it means “Take me!” Whilst it is extremely risky and unwise for men to take “No” to mean “Take me!” if they do not know the woman, in a Taken In Hand marriage only a small fraction of the communication between man and wife is in words. Most communication is unspoken. The amount of unspoken information passing between two people who know each other well is vast. This is why it is not irresponsible immoral madness for a man in a Taken In Hand relationship with a woman like DeeMarie, to act on the woman's unspoken “Take me!” despite the woman's spoken “No!”

DeeMarie is clearly looking for a very special man—one who has the ability to pick up on her unspoken wishes without her having to spell them out for him, and one who has the courage to act on this knowledge. The beauty of finding a man like this is that—contrary to what some readers might think—such a man is far less likely to harm a woman than a man less able to pick up subtle cues and hear unspoken wishes. The latter man lacks the necessary sensitivity and psychological insight that DeeMarie and many other Taken In Hand woman need. Such men can also seem annoyingly tentative and deferential to women like DeeMarie.

You are right not to settle for a man who doesn't get this, DeeMarie. There are men out there who do get it, and who do have the necessary strength and courage and knowledge.

Communication is more than words

This reminds me of some lines written by the gifted French poet André de Chénier (beheaded in 1794, at the age of 32):

"Votre bouche dit non,
Votre voix et vos yeux
Disent un mot plus doux
Et le disent bien mieux."

(Your mouth says no,your voice and your eyes say a sweeter word, and say it much better.)

Pierre-Olivier

In my case.

Ah... Twelve years back or so, when my husband and I first started dating I dealt with this very issues by not saying "no". Since this is the rape case publicized safe word of the century. Maybe that is a good ways to look at it. You are asking a man to ignore the one universal safe word. In most circles a man that ignores a safe word is not allowed to play. I knew that any sane man early on in a relationship is going to hear "no" and immediately stop. So I did not say it, but I did want a strong man. One who was willing to get his way. I wanted my man to seduce me into submission and not be discourage by a little resistance. So that is exactly what I gave him, resistance. To my pleasure he rose to the action and the rest is history.

Now he knows that "no" means "take me", but we have been married for eleven years. I am not sure when that became clearly understood. We both slowly tested it, as our relationship developed, stronger and closer.

If you're in an established r

If you're in an established relationship with a deep, intuitive connection, you shouldn't have to worry about feminists "screaming" anything.

Note to guys: if you're not in the above described circumstance, definitely worry about screaming feminists and basically women in general unless you want to find yourself in HUGE legal hot water.

I myself like to be taken AND made love to. My man should know when I want either one or the other. Or both. Now that's a man!

Intuitive smarts

I think we need to really think this through. Expecting a man to have 'intuitive smarts' is asking quite a lot, is it not? Does it make him less of a man to not be a mind reader?
Part of a mature loving relationship is the ability to communicate wants, desires, needs, etc... For instance, I had to communicate my 'need' to be spanked to my husband. That was the hardest thing to do ever. Because of society's programing, I doubt he would have arrived there on his own, nor would have I if I hadn't just have happened to land on a dd website. I was just as surprised as he was that these kinds of relationships exist.
So, if we have to tell them, "I have a fantasy of being ravished", what's the big deal? My husband would nod, say 'hmm' and go on with his day. Some day in the future, when I wasn't expecting it, I'd probably get that fantasy fulfilled.
Anyway, I just think we need to be careful of what to expect from our men. Otherwise, we are reverting back to old patterns...at least for me...of expecting him to just 'know'. Right?
Maybe I misunderstood the post or maybe a guy's opinion is needed here?
*RUTH*

Not less of a man

I agree with this absolutely. You cannot expect a man to know everything intuitively. There may be some who do, but the majority, I would guess, do not, and need you to tell them what you would like them to do. it certainly doesn't make him any less of a man if he doesn't know what you want from him without any prompting.

I generally had to indicate my desire to be spanked to men before they would actually do anything about it. My hsuband certainly didn't know by instinct that this was what I wanted, until I made it clear to him. And I imagine that the same applies to ravishing, if that is your cup of tea. Once he knows what you want, he may thoroughly enjoy doing it, how will you know if you don't give him the chance?

Louise

You have to start with NO meaning NO

I agree with Ruth. DeeMarie runs the risk of ending up with a serial rapist instead of a very special guy that picks up on her cues. In any relationship, romantic, friends, co-workers, you have to start out with no meaning no, yes meaning yes without many maybes. Then you can reveal yourself and your likes and dislikes as trust developes.

Instant gratification is usually very fleeting. Being ravished by someone you trust and love, when you least expect, that is for real.

It is a lot to expect and some women expect it.

It [acting without explicit consent] is a lot to expect and some women expect it.

For them—women who want to be taken in hand against their will—a big part of romance is encapsulated in the notion of a man "just knowing" what to do.

It is a matter of personal taste. Ruth's desire to be explicit is perfectly valid as is DeeMarie's desire not to be explicit.

Expecting a man to have 'intuitive smarts' is asking quite a lot, is it not?

Sure, it *is* asking quite a lot and it is quite unfair to expect most men to be able to do it. But some women expect a lot of their men.

Does it make him less of a man to not be a mind reader?

Well... an inability to read minds does not make a man "substandard", so let's reverse it: It makes him *more* of a man if he *can* read her mind.

And unless his mind-reading capability is perfect, he is taking a big risk by acting without explicit consent.

If woman expects that kind of ability and risk-taking from a man, she would be well advised to make it worth the risk. A man who takes that risk isn't going to do it for just any woman. He will only do it for a woman who is very special.

I happen to be married to such a woman. Take a look at my first post on this site: How can I be sure that she wants to be taken in hand? You will see me at the cusp of my struggle with her. You will see just how difficult it is for a man to deal with such a woman.

I had two distinct advantages over most men: twenty-plus years of marriage to hone my mind-reading ability and the help of the folks on this site. With that going for me, I managed to "get it".

Then one day, after we had worked it out and gotten to the point where we both understood what we meant, I gave her a long, hard spanking.

Because, in my opinion, being Taken in Hand against her will, or being "ravished" against her will—without even being willing to discuss it—is more than a woman has a right to expect without some serious consequences.

But what if he's a man that y

But what if he's a man that you absolutely DO NOT want to be with, but he thinks he's picking up on signals from you that you just want to be taken?...as many men have sworn was the case before with women when they were on the witness stand defending against rape. So he takes you really and truly against your will. You're only word to say that you don't want it is 'stop or 'no', but you've said that really means "take me".

I don't know...I think we have to be careful with this. My husband and I play this game all the time, but we've discussed it and we have other words that mean "stop" for me to use. Unless one is in a trusting relationship with someone where they've pre-discussed the word 'no', then I most certainly do think that no means no. It's just too serious a thing for men to have to guess at, read minds or body signals, or just hope for the best. I don't think we should put them in that position.

We need our men to be strong for us and to be confident in their control of the house and in their ability to make decisions. The last thing I'd want to do is weaken them by putting them in situations where they could end up in jail unless they're a mind reader or at the very least, just really lucky.

I really believe you have to verbally consent first, and then you can say no all you want.

Agreed

"There may be some who do, but the majority, I would guess, do not... it certainly doesn't make him any less of a man if he doesn't know what you want from him without any prompting."—Louise

That's what I like to hear. Thanks. I would imagine that the vast majority of men feel similarly. I'm not a mind reader, and I'd really rather not end up as a defendant in a rape case. Even less would I want to hurt someone who I cared about that much. It'd be great if the woman I was with always knew everything I wanted, but in a world that was not created by an erotic novelist I think we all have to settle for just telling our partner what we want at times.

"I really believe you have to verbally consent first, and then you can say no all you want." so_sharlemaine

This is how I feel as well. If you're with a man who really is the Taken in Hand type and you have rape fantasies, simply tell him. If he's thinking straight, he'll probably just acknowledge this and move on to a different subject. And then... you'll be in for a pleasant surprise in the near future ;)

I agree with most of the posters

This is incredibly risky, and it is a little unreasonable I think to expect guys to read your mind. We in America are in a highly litigious society and just the accusation of rape can ruin men forever. Duke Lacrosse anyone? I know this is Taken in Hand and certain women derive pleasure from being overwhelmed (I understand that, I really do), but please be strong enough to communicate honestly. Try and see where he is coming from, "Taken In Hand" man or not.

--Harold

Good article and comments. Mo

Good article and comments. Most people fail to understand however that there is a HUGELY INCREDIBLE difference between "no" and "NO!". Token resistance is extremely different than real resistance where she forcefully pushes you away and yells "NO!". It's pretty sad that I guess some men don't know the difference these days?

Different kinds of 'no'

I don't see why a man nowadays should have to distinguish between different kinds of 'no', not when he doesn't yet understand the woman's desires completely. Frankly, I think it is sadder that a woman can't just say 'yes' when she means yes and 'no' when she means no, at least until they have reached a stage where he knows what she means. Playing games of that kind is for when you know someone really, really well.

Louise

Take Her

I think a man must be cautious, for a while. Women can be ambivalent about wanting to be taken. A woman who says "No" but means "Yes" and then changes her mind in the morning when things don't work out, could endanger a man's life.

So ravishment can only be accomplished when both partners truly trust each other (this takes many months or even years in which the relationship becomes firmly established). Then, even if a woman truly does not want the man to take her at a particular time, but who nonetheless has implicitly given "blanket consent", violent loving can be rewarding and very useful to help cement the relationship, earn the respect of the woman, and punish her for rebellion when necessary.

blanket consent

I agree with this. We have blanket consent and my husband can take me when ever he wants. He sometimes uses sex for control and this is something I love.

If however he took me when I was unwell or upset then I would not love it. He knows this so would not do it.

Choices..or lack thereof..

I completely agree that we each have needs that need to be met. Whether they are the same or different from yours or mine matter not. Yours are important and finding the right person is the integral key.
In my particular case, my chosen men were utter failures. I can't say for sure (or want to share) what went behind my choice of men.
It wasn't until I was told in no uncertain terms I wasn't in control any longer that I sat up and paid attention. For me it was that very lack of choosing which started the path to happiness. However, a lot went into making it right. His complete and rapt attention to what I wanted, thought, fantasized and felt. Nothing was left unknown. If I had wanted to be ravished, then ravished I would have gotten, although not necessarily on my terms. But loss of control for me is a huge spark in a Taken In Hand relationship.
Perhaps I was lucky, perhaps it was meant to be. But my needs were met and continue to be so. Not without bumps or need to clear the path from time to time. I do believe the precedence of listening from the beginning saved us to this day. Being supportive and understanding helped us to build the strength we still have. It allows us both to feed our needs, desires and sexuality. And for me...always my securities are important. Oddly enough it's my strength of belief in love and his strength of character to rise above that let us get a bit outside the box with each other. The fun of trying and learning has given huge satisfaction over the years. But it was clearly not my design of choice..thank goodness.
-Blush

Can't "When I say no to you, please ignore it" mean "Take me?"

It is my considered opinion that those feminists only wanted to make it so that if you DIDN'T mean "take me" when you said "no," a man couldn't decide FOR you that he could proceed without knowing that you meant it.

I'm sorry, I just think it's really unsafe for us to expect a man to magically appear who understands that in THIS relationship with THIS woman, this is how things can and SHOULD work.

A man who is intuitive enough to pick up cues and is everything described in this article deserves every effort a woman can make to make him feel safe and keep him from worrying that he's an inconsiderate abuser. And part of making him feel safe (the best guys in the world still need reassurance) is talking to him, and letting him know from YOUR mouth that what he thinks he should do is right.

Remember the context

M_lurkinghorror and Harold, I agree that it would be unsafe with a man the woman does not know very very well, but on this site we are talking about married couples, many of whom have been married for decades. In that context, it really isn't unsafe, it's fun. You can't just think about how unsafe sex is in a casual/short-term sex situation (which some might think is an unsafe situation in which to be having any kind of sex) and generalise from that.

Tipping the wink!

It takes time and trust to get these sorts of dynamics going. I trully feel for the men who have replied to this article, despite being of totally the same persuasion as DeeMarie. We live in dangerous times, people can be fickle with their expressed wants and desires and alleged rapists are held in the lowest of the low class of criminal. You can, without trying to sound like a complete killjoy, understand their concerns!

I discovered that, turn off though it was initially, explaining that I enjoyed ravishment fantasy to a man I completely respected and trusted, saved the day. The rules were set. Once we built up our relationship and found ourselves trully compatable, his wariness turned to amusement and enjoyment, although when I asked for feedback (perhaps unwise with retrospect!), he said he enjoyed it because I did. Non-verbally, his body language indicated otherwise. I feel this is because he was uncomfortable with discussing it and men don't tend to like to analyse everything. So now we go with the flow. Sometimes he'll say, "I don't wish to hear any more about it, young lady....". I have taken this to mean, less talk and more action.

Now we get on with it. I get taken and he takes me. Instead of debating the use of "no" or its intonation, I'll say something like "....you won't get away with this you barbarian..." and wink at the same time. The wink excuses a random, abstract safeword like "scrambled eggs" which trully ruins the heat of the bodice ripping moment! It also avoids having to plough into further discussion. He is an alpha male and enjoys it. I love being taken and I enjoy it. The wink is a covert sign to proceed and avoids a lengthy, unnecessary debate.

As the Editor so correctly points out above, relationships on this website feature many long-term relationships where a great deal of trust has been established. I feel that were I to be single again, I would proceed with caution initially until I got to know a man, not only for my own safety, but for his too. It would be nice to believe that men are intuitive to all our senses, but sadly, this theory can sometimes be naive and eutopian. Plus you don't know if anything of this nature happened in a person's history (e.g. true abuse) until you get to know them better.

So, I'd do the homework first. It's boring, it's a turn off, etc... but at least you'll express what you want directly, know if the feeling is mutual or whether you're on dangerous territory, and can proceed. When you get the relationship you want, you can then gradually withdraw your plans, wishes and intents because intuition will be there and both parties can get on with it safe in the knowledge that this, for some, extremely pleasureable relationship dynamic can be just that.

Why "No" Can Mean "Yes"

It is quite likely—most probably even a sure bet—that Taken in Hand excites a different part of the brain from that activated by tea and crumpets. Despite pretenses of sophistication, humans have not evolved nearly as much as they like to pretend in politics of the bedroom.

My no does mean no.

It takes a LOT for me to say no to my partner sexually. I dislike it so much. I resist it at all possible costs. So if I say no, he can rest assured that I really do mean it. I mostly prefer severe honesty--whether speaking in the affirmative or in the negative--when it comes to sexual matters. That's just me though. ~HollyCakes

Yes and No

No means no. Yes means yes. If a man doesn't understand it, I don't think very highly of his intelect. In fact, it is a definitive turn-off.

No?

If you are in a Taken In Hand relationship, when would a woman ever say, "No."? I ask this sincerely. I am always available to my husband. I would never turn him away. Of course if I am ill or unwell, he is thoughtful enough not to ask. He always has a willing participant in me.

Under a misapprehension about Taken In Hand

Ellie too asks:

If you are in a Taken In Hand relationship, when would a woman ever say, "No."?

You seem to be under a misapprehension. “Taken In Hand” is not synonymous with “submissive.” Taken In Hand does not imply wives obeying mindlessly or never saying no. Indeed, many husbands in Taken In Hand relationships have said that they would not want a submissive wife. They revel in their wife's spiritedness, and enjoy taking her in hand when she gets out of hand. That is why the site is called Taken In Hand as opposed to “Always/Already In Hand.” Whilst some men prefer submissive women, others—those of a Taken In Hand inclination, for example—find endlessly submissive women a bit boring. The men in Taken In Hand relationships enjoy submitting their wife as opposed to having a wife who never says no in the first place so never needs to be taken in hand or brought into line.

It's good for both the wife and the husband to know that the husband is actually in control, and that he can actually take his wife or take her in hand—submit her— if he chooses.

And besides, saying no can be fun! Who doesn't like to wrestle with a hot partner now and again?