The missionary position appeals to many Taken In Hand women for the same reason some other women thoroughly dislike it: because the man-on-top is the male-superior position. That has been deemed by some women to be humiliating subjugation of a woman. Some women want to be on top because that is a less vulnerable position—one from which they can easily escape. In the female-superior position they can also (prima facie) call the shots, dominate, and, in some cases, sublimate their Basic Instinct fantasies in a bit of face-slapping, erotic or not so erotic asphyxiation and other such acts of revenge against masculine power.
The Taken In Hand women has no such inner conflict about the idea of masculine power. Indeed, she is as drawn to it as some women are repulsed by it. And instead of fighting it, she finds it erotic, fun, a source of deep joy and contentment. And yes, for many a Taken In Hand woman, lying on her back, exposed, vulnerable, receptive, trusting him, there for him, accepting him, accepting his authority, accepting his power as a man, accepting his dominance, being pinned under her man's imprisoning weight, unable to escape until he allows it, looking up at him with soft submissive eyes as he enters her in the male-superior position—the missionary position—feels physically and psychologically right. Soothing. Feminine. Woman qua woman, as Ayn Rand might say. It is no coincidence that Nancy Friday called the book in which she sought to prove that women's sexual fantasies are now dominant, Women on Top.
This is not to denigrate other positions or other preferences, merely to explain why some Taken In Hand folk might feel especially delighted by the much-maligned missionary position. (Taken In Hand folk might well love other positions too, but this is just about this particular position. And I certainly do not mean to imply that a Taken In Hand woman would only adopt her preferred positions. No doubt the right man could subject a Taken In Hand woman to any number of positions without any problem!) There may well be other reasons for the appeal of the missionary position, such as more mechanical/physical ones, and perhaps there might be a (biological?!) tendency to prefer it because it might increase the chance of impregnation, but here let's stick to discussion of the more obvious psychological reasons for its appeal.
When a Taken In Hand woman knows that her man is going to take her, she responds. Her body and soul are receptive, thrilled, wanting and welcoming her man. Ecstatic. In this one moment, she may go from feeling tired, stressed, distracted, or grumpy, to craving her man with an unparalleled intensity. No need for hours of the dreaded “foreplay” here! (Just the word “foreplay” is enough to give me a headache, and I'm a woman so goodness knows how tedious it must sound to a man!) When a man takes his woman, he takes possession of her. He acts, he dominates, he penetrates. And when he does, his Taken In Hand woman accepts, submits, receives.
The missionary position is, or can be, a natural, clear and easy expression of male dominance and female acceptance of that dominance. The woman is literally under him just as she is under his authority. It is not a position in which many Taken In Hand women would fear they were being put in the dominant position. It is not a position requiring a lot of elaborate effort for the couple to feel the masculine-feminine polarity, the man's power, and the willing surrender to that power by the woman. It is a position in which a woman can easily experience her man as being very manly, masterful, in control. And it is a position in which a man can experience his woman as being very feminine, vulnerable, soft and submissive.
How can so many couples manage to experience the missionary position as boring, unadventurous and anything but erotic? OK, don't answer that off-topic rhetorical question!
[EDITOR'S NOTE: My delicate sensibilities and prudish heart would very much appreciate responses phrased without getting explicit or graphic.]