fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2861 ]

[ SECRET POST #2861 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2861 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 052 secrets from Secret Submission Post #409.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Don't worry, OP, this is a textbook "forbidden fruit" reaction. It also probably means that you should stop judging people for what they ship, seeing as you're kind of in the same boat.

"stop jusdging people" hahaha like that will ever happen. Being lovingly raped is the biggest women's fantasy and yet sjws still need to tell women to stop having orgasms.

...are you the yaoi anon? XD

(I don't have anything against people enjoying the rape kink, that is, but wtf do SJWs have to do with anything in this thread?)

Why yaoi? It's an universal female kink that's present in shoujo, josei and western romance too, basically any female-aimed and female-created smut.

I guess I'm kind of paranoid :/ I've never got any hate on f!s, but the recent shitstorms have made me suspect that the day may come when one of the anons I've argued with will come back and start posting odd passive-aggressive comments.

DA I'm one of the people you argued with. So I WAS right when I pointed out it wasn't rape and that throwing in "stockholm syndrome" was fucking absurd and shown how you have no idea how SS develops, eh? No need to apologize for the dogpiling, it's enough that you and others were all completely wrong.

That's FSOG anon. Now that you mention it, they kinda sound like yaoi anon.

Read the comment above.

Alrighty then. Will do

Gonna need to cite your source on it being the biggest women's fantasy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/25/magazine/25desire-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

Meana has learned too from her attempts as a clinician to help patients with dyspareunia. Though she explained that the condition, which can make intercourse excruciating, is not in itself a disorder of low desire, she said that her patients reported reduced genital pain as their desire increased. The problem was how to augment desire, and despite prevailing wisdom, the answer, she told me, had “little to do with building better relationships,” with fostering communication between patients and their partners. She rolled her eyes at such niceties. She recalled a patient whose lover was thoroughly empathetic and asked frequently during lovemaking, “ ‘Is this O.K.?’ Which was very unarousing to her. It was loving, but there was no oomph” — no urgency emanating from the man, no sign that his craving of the patient was beyond control.

“Female desire,” Meana said, speaking broadly and not only about her dyspareunic patients, “is not governed by the relational factors that, we like to think, rule women’s sexuality as opposed to men’s.” She finished a small qualitative study last year consisting of long interviews with 20 women in marriages that were sexually troubled. Although bad relationships often kill desire, she argued, good ones don’t guarantee it. She quoted from one participant’s representative response: “We kiss. We hug. I tell him, ‘I don’t know what it is.’ We have a great relationship. It’s just that one area” — the area of her bed, the place desolated by her loss of lust.

The generally accepted therapeutic notion that, for women, incubating intimacy leads to better sex is, Meana told me, often misguided. “Really,” she said, “women’s desire is not relational, it’s narcissistic” — it is dominated by the yearnings of “self-love,” by the wish to be the object of erotic admiration and sexual need. Still on the subject of narcissism, she talked about research indicating that, in comparison with men, women’s erotic fantasies center less on giving pleasure and more on getting it. “When it comes to desire,” she added, “women may be far less relational than men.”

Like Chivers, Meana thinks of female sexuality as divided into two systems. But Meana conceives of those systems in a different way than her colleague. On the one hand, as Meana constructs things, there is the drive of sheer lust, and on the other the impetus of value. For evolutionary and cultural reasons, she said, women might set a high value on the closeness and longevity of relationships: “But it’s wrong to think that because relationships are what women choose they’re the primary source of women’s desire.”

Meana spoke about two elements that contribute to her thinking: first, a great deal of data showing that, as measured by the frequency of fantasy, masturbation and sexual activity, women have a lower sex drive than men, and second, research suggesting that within long-term relationships, women are more likely than men to lose interest in sex. Meana posits that it takes a greater jolt, a more significant stimulus, to switch on a woman’s libido than a man’s. “If I don’t love cake as much as you,” she told me, “my cake better be kick-butt to get me excited to eat it.” And within a committed relationship, the crucial stimulus of being desired decreases considerably, not only because the woman’s partner loses a degree of interest but also, more important, because the woman feels that her partner is trapped, that a choice — the choosing of her — is no longer being carried out.

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.

Yet while Meana minimized the role of relationships in stoking desire, she didn’t dispense with the sexual relevance, for women, of being cared for and protected. “What women want is a real dilemma,” she said. Earlier, she showed me, as a joke, a photograph of two control panels, one representing the workings of male desire, the second, female, the first with only a simple on-off switch, the second with countless knobs. “Women want to be thrown up against a wall but not truly endangered. Women want a caveman and caring. If I had to pick an actor who embodies all the qualities, all the contradictions, it would be Denzel Washington. He communicates that kind of power and that he is a good man.”

After our discussion of the alley encounter, we talked about erotic — as opposed to aversive — fantasies of rape. According to an analysis of relevant studies published last year in The Journal of Sex Research, an analysis that defines rape as involving “the use of physical force, threat of force, or incapacitation through, for example, sleep or intoxication, to coerce a woman into sexual activity against her will,” between one-third and 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.

The appeal is, above all, paradoxical, Meana pointed out: rape means having no control, while fantasy is a domain manipulated by the self. She stressed the vast difference between the pleasures of the imagined and the terrors of the real. “I hate the term ‘rape fantasies,’ ” she went on. “They’re really fantasies of submission.” She spoke about the thrill of being wanted so much that the aggressor is willing to overpower, to take. “But ‘aggression,’ ‘dominance,’ I have to find better words. ‘Submission’ isn’t even a good word” — it didn’t reflect the woman’s imagining of an ultimately willing surrender.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-sex/201001/womens-rape-fantasies-how-common-what-do-they-mean

From 1973 through 2008, nine surveys of women's rape fantasies have been published. They show that about four in 10 women admit having them (31 to 57 percent) with a median frequency of about once a month. Actual prevalence of rape fantasies is probably higher because women may not feel comfortable admitting them.

For the latest report (Bivona, J. and J. Critelli. "The Nature of Women's Rape Fantasies: An Analysis of Prevalence, Frequency, and Contents," Journal of Sex Research (2009) 46:33), psychologists at North Texas University asked 355 college women: How often have you fantasized being overpowered/forced/raped by a man/woman to have oral/vaginal/anal sex against your will?

Sixty-two percent said they'd had at least one such fantasy. But responses varied depending on the terminology used. When asked about being "overpowered by a man," 52 percent said they'd had that fantasy, the situation most typically depicted in women's romance fiction. But when the term was "rape," only 32 percent said they'd had the fantasy. These findings are in the same ballpark as previous reports.

Frequency of rape fantasies varied substantially. Thirty-eight percent of respondents never had them. Of those who did, 25 percent reported such fantasies less than once a year. Thirteen percent had them a few times a year, 11 percent once a month, 8 percent once a week, and 5 percent several times a week. (Twenty-one percent of the respondents said they'd been sexually assaulted in real life.)

Rape fantasies can be either erotic or aversive. In erotic fantasies, the woman thinks: "I'm being forced and I enjoy it." In aversive fantasies, she thinks: "I'm being forced and I hate it." Forty-five-percent of the women in the recent survey had fantasies that were entirely erotic. Nine percent were entirely aversive. And 46 percent were mixed.

Rape or near-rape fantasies are central to romance novels, one of the perennial best-selling categories in fiction. These books are often called "bodice-rippers" and have titles like Love's Sweet Savage Fury, which imply at least some degree of force. In them, a handsome cad becomes so overwhelmed by his attraction to the heroine that he loses all control and must have her, even if she refuses--which she does initially, but then eventually melts into submission, desire, and ultimately fulfillment.

Romance novels are often called "porn for women." Porn is all about sexual fantasies. In porn for men, the fantasy is sexual abundance--eager women who can't get enough and have no interest in a relationship. In porn for women as depicted in romance novels, the fantasy is to be desired so much that the man loses all control, though he never actually hurts the woman, and in the end, marries her.

What do rape fantasies mean? In my opinion, they are no different from any other fantasies. They are neither wrong nor perverted. They imply nothing about one's mental health or real-life sexual inclinations. They just happen, to somewhere around half of women. If you have such fantasies and feel bad about them, I can't tell you how to feel. But I can assure you that you are not alone. Rape or near-rape fantasies are surprisingly common.

32% isn't a majority.

Uhh, it may be?

Did you read the article? It explains the numbers change according to the terminology used because if you're imagining you/your proxy being lovingly "raped" then you are not really imagining them being raped. The fantasy is to be dominated and to be the object of another's desire because they are completely taken with you, not to be actually traumatized and harmed, which is what rape is in real life as well as in most people's minds.

But that's not actually a rape fantasy. It's a domination fantasy.

I witnessed this very comm bitching many times that everything that had someone saying "no" or showing otherwise refusal and being forced to sex was RAPE, even if they enjoyed it, even the author didn't treat it as rape, and if the author didn't treat it as rape that was RAPE CULTURE. What's with the sudden change of tune?

...because I'm one person, not the entire comm?

DA The distinction comes from how the person/victim treats it. It's possible to get off, and therefore enjoy sex in a physical sense, and still consider it rape. This is a pretty common experience of male victims, it can play a role in their possible reluctance to report it, as well as society's reaction to it.

How the author treats it is another issue, but it can cause problems for real people in the real world.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-11-03 05:55 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-11-03 06:03 (UTC) - Expand

Would you use that distinction if this was a discussion about someone saying their rape scene was "only domination fantasy"?

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-11-03 06:09 (UTC) - Expand

I feel like this says a lot about people's approach to sex. It seems like a lot of straight women are still very down on their own sexual desires. I think the author of 50 Shades said something about 'sex without guilt' or something like that. It's a sad way of thinking, but it rings true for a lot of women.

I don't see how wanting to be wanted = being down in your own sexual desires. Just because you don't find the same things arousing doesn't mean you have to belittle women who do.

There have already been many studies on this (hit up wiki and google) and they have proven the guilt theory inconclusive. Some women just like the idea of being desirable.

When will you people get that being desired is the thrill.

Well, that came out of nowhere.

Chill.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only