Women who like to be taken forcefully

[sexyhelene]

I am a bit of a strange duck. With my hubby I am clearly the dominant party. He is completely submissive and would never try to take me forcibly. I have been with agressive men that do so and I like it at times but by and large I like to be in control. That being said, in my experiences with other women I am completely submissive and I LOVE to be taken forcibly.

So do I. I'd love to chat about it

 

[Polranny]

I don't think that's it at all. I think the reason has everything to do with socialization rather than some sort of inherent inborne desire. Society teaches women we shouldn't like sex in general and we certainly shouldn't ever seek it out or else we're sluts. Ravishment fantasies are the natural consequence of women receiving the message that female sexuality is something shameful.

I agree. It's societal, attitudes change over time

 

[Mindy2007]

I love being forcefully used

 

[Yesok1]

Me, me, force me, use me.

 

[Toffer_Guy]

I don't think that's it at all. I think the reason has everything to do with socialization rather than some sort of inherent inborne desire. Society teaches women we shouldn't like sex in general and we certainly shouldn't ever seek it out or else we're sluts. Ravishment fantasies are the natural consequence of women receiving the message that female sexuality is something shameful.

Agreed. In psychology, we were taught about how both religion and puritanical society has developed to treat women as sexual but also shame them for enjoying it. Men who sleep around are seen as ‘studs’ but women who sleep around are ‘sluts’ and ‘dirty.’ Patriarchy seriously wants to control women.

With humans being social beings, there is a subconscious desire to want to avoid being shunned, shamed, or outcast. So, consensual non-consensual fantasies are far more common than most people would admit. Just look at how many trashy romance novels involve some guy ‘taking’ a woman. Too often, people confuse a person’s fantasy as something they actually want. We’ve all heard, “If you fantasize about it. You’ll do it.” As if it’s some certainty. Which is bullshit. Just because you get mad and want to punch someone doesn’t mean you’d actually do it. Fantasies are the same.

I have a lot of erotic fantasies I have zero interest in trying in reality. Fantasies are a safe way to explore taboos.

No woman really wants to be raped. It’s a vile and violent act that isn’t punished seriously enough. What people who have those fantasies want is freedom from consequences. In their fantasies, they can imagine doing things they see as perverted, but rationalize it as if they didn’t have a choice. Even thought it’s what they imagined for themself. It’s a paradox.

 

[Xenaqueen]

For myself, I love it. Especially when it is unexpected. This is my personal opinion.

 

[cowboyup6977]

I absolutely when R is dominating

 

[Toffer_Guy]

For myself, I love it. Especially when it is unexpected. This is my personal opinion.

That could be really sexy if you have an agreement with a partner. A lot of people have this twisted view of rough sex or BDSM as all violent and cruel. It can actually be an amazing expression of trust, as long as it’s consensual. Knowing that the submissive trusts their dom to give them control, even if just for a little while.

 

[TnA4U]

If I may, I don't believe the foundation must lie in a Puritanical upbringing or socialization of sex as taboo. Rather, I feel for many women who are in positions of responsibility and power, that we are often viewed in more masculine terms and our positions often call for us to exercise our more masculine traits. Given we are not the traditional version or stereotype of a woman, we are seen as 'The Bitch' - hardly a sexual creature. Moreover, for women to rise to power and achieve a level of authority, we often must subjugate our emotions to be perceived as more rational. This is really the repression of the feminine, not the sexual.

This introduces a dual need for sexual submission or being 'forcefully taken.' First, it validates the woman as a woman. Being 'taken,' for me, signals that I can drive a man wild with my feminine and sexual prowess. That is reaffirming - I'm not just an intelligent, controlling, ice-princess.

Second, the 'forcefulness' removes the mental and emotional constraints that powerful women in their work-a-day worlds must operate within. When a man overpowers me, he breaks through and shatters the constraints I have carefully constructed. Because it is a forceful act, I needn't feel self-reproachment or shame or guilt - after all, I was overpowered.

Given my carefully constructed persona, developed with great tenacity and grit over a long period of time, it would be incommensurate and threatening to my self-image to just willfully submit to a man. However, if I am powerful enough to drive a worthy male, dare I say opponent (because everyone and everything is a challenge), over the edge with lust that he must simply rip the clothing from my body, throw me to the bed, and fuck the living daylights out of me... then I can still maintain my dignity when I wipe the cum from my tits.

 

[submissa]

@TnA4U I certainly didn't mean to imply that my explanation is the only one. I work in a male-dominated STEM field and have found it necessary to alter my communication style to be more "masculine" as a result. I find myself responding to men in general in a more assertive, sometimes even combative, way... so I understand where you're coming from.

Your explanation is still related to gender roles and socialization even though it's not directly about stigmatizing female sexuality. That's the main point I was trying to make - I take exception to the idea that "there is something buried deep in the female human psyche that craves ravishment."

 

[TnA4U]

@TnA4U I certainly didn't mean to imply that my explanation is the only one. I work in a male-dominated STEM field and have found it necessary to alter my communication style to be more "masculine" as a result. I find myself responding to men in general in a more assertive, sometimes even combative, way... so I understand where you're coming from.

Your explanation is still related to gender roles and socialization even though it's not directly about stigmatizing female sexuality. That's the main point I was trying to make - I take exception to the idea that "there is something buried deep in the female human psyche that craves ravishment."

Thank you for that. And, I, in no way, meant to imply that my experience and perspective were the only or dominant ones.

 

[paulaann]

I have always liked a man to take what he wants in bed, if you want to fuck me from behind roll me over and pull my ass up. If you want me to suck it grab some hair and shove it in my mouth, I’ll get the idea! Can’t be doing with, can we try this? Do you mind if I do this? I like a man to take what he wants. Walking towards me with a hard on as I lay on the bed knowing I’m going to get it no matter what is always a turn on. As is holding my arms down as I’m fucked, that always ends in orgasm for me. One lover used to tie me to the bed and fuck me, once he tied me and blindfolded me and let his friend fuck me first. I came on both cocks, thing is I knew his friend and knew it was him fucking me. Another time it was rather different but I don’t think that’s a story for on here.

 

[Tommelon]

My gf does... I'm open for her screwing with another man.

 

[IrisAlthea]

Rather, I feel for many women who are in positions of responsibility and power, that we are often viewed in more masculine terms and our positions often call for us to exercise our more masculine traits. Given we are not the traditional version or stereotype of a woman, we are seen as 'The Bitch' - hardly a sexual creature. Moreover, for women to rise to power and achieve a level of authority, we often must subjugate our emotions to be perceived as more rational. This is really the repression of the feminine, not the sexual.

First of all, I’d like to thank you for a thought provoking post.

I was not raised with a very puritanical view of sex but I can’t say that I hold a view of responsibility and power as something that isn’t feminine either.
I actually think it is an exception in history and society to have women not being responsible adults working outside the immediate family.
Organizing households and village life, leading hired staff or younger and lower in the hierarchy peers, has required women to wield power and lead throughout history.
Having the resources for supporting a pure housewife without having too much land an goods to need more people at work is an exception to the norm, historically and globally speaking.

First, it validates the woman as a woman. Being 'taken,' for me, signals that I can drive a man wild with my feminine and sexual prowess. That is reaffirming - I'm not just an intelligent, controlling, ice-princess.

So for me, this has never been a thing.
Feminine for me is what I am and not what I do and while I enjoy it when a man really sees all of me, I don’t need that affirmation to know that it is all there.
I can understand how it could work like that for someone raised with the view of femininity that you speak of and I’m sure you are not alone in that.

Second, the 'forcefulness' removes the mental and emotional constraints that powerful women in their work-a-day worlds must operate within. When a man overpowers me, he breaks through and shatters the constraints I have carefully constructed.

This part of it I can very much relate to though.
It can feel a bit like a shell, that is needed in a less than safe world and it can be hard to shed even when not needed.

I can still clearly remember when my first serious boyfriend visited after us being long distance for months.
While it wasn’t super forceful, it definitely fell on him to take that first step back to physical intimacy and even closeness.
If it had been up to mee, we’d probably still be poliely but slightly awkwardly making conversation in the kitchen and I remember it feeling like there was an actual glass wall around me.

Because it is a forceful act, I needn't feel self-reproachment or shame or guilt - after all, I was overpowered.

The shame and guilt part are not part of it for me really.
That busting out of the shell, feels like being let out of a cage.

it would be incommensurate and threatening to my self-image to just willfully submit to a man. However, if I am powerful enough to drive a worthy male, dare I say opponent (because everyone and everything is a challenge), over the edge with lust

Again, I can very much understand this way of thinking about it, but I don’t quite relate to it like that.
I do need to feel that I am willfully going along with it - like a rollercoaster that I decided to get on even if I may currently be screaming my head off about it.

I also never thought of men in general as opponents and absolutely not my partners.
I want to be reasonably sure that the rollercoaster is in working order and doesn’t intend to throw me off the mountain even if I know things could still go wrong.

 

[TnA4U]

Lucky men... they can live a lifetime deciphering the enchanting mysterious differences between women.

 

[LibertineDaddy]

Lucky men... they can live a lifetime deciphering the enchanting mysterious differences between women.

If only there were some socially acceptable sign that said "put your hands on me" or "push me against the wall and fuck me hard." lol

 

[Yesok1]

I don't really deserve to be treated with respect. I love my partner forcing me. She is respectful of me though, but if she did treat roughly and with force I'd happily submit.

My ex treated me roughly. She forced me to have sex pushing boundaries close to the unacceptable. But, I know I am not equal. I am not worthy of anyone, and any contact physical I recieve is appreciated.

 

[TnA4U]

I'll make t- shirts with plenty room for qualifiers and disclaimers!

 

[hrdmngd2find]

Lucky men... they can live a lifetime deciphering the enchanting mysterious differences between women.

Well,... that's part of the fun of it.

 

[hrdmngd2find]

I actually think it is an exception in history and society to have women not being responsible adults working outside the immediate family.
Organizing households and village life, leading hired staff or younger and lower in the hierarchy peers, has required women to wield power and lead throughout history.
Having the resources for supporting a pure housewife without having too much land an goods to need more people at work is an exception to the norm, historically and globally speaking.

The industrial revolution, at least in the US (and probably Europe, but especially the US) beginning in the 1830s and continuing until the 1970s (in the US), changed family structures to emphasize the nuclear family and the "separate spheres" to create the cult of domesticity, aka "housewife." (though the term "housewife" is from middle English) This occurred mainly in suburban middle class homes and maybe with the more upwardly mobile working class. Families outside cities, those still operating within an agrarian system, tended to have more blurred roles. The husband and wife worked together, and the work was usually near the home. Extended families were more the norm for practical reasons. With hunter-gather societies, which preceded and then coexisted other systems, you would find more bifurcation with the roles: men going to hunt or fight while women focus on gathering and more domestic tasks.

Your idea hinges a little on the meaning of "power." Influence is a form of power, and one can easily see how women, even in the most patriarchal society, employed tremendous power through their influence on many aspects of life, if not from most official roles in government or business.

As for a more formal notion of power, it would be an interesting world history survey to identify the percentages of societies where "power" in the more official type of defined leadership roles in governance and commerce was equally shared with women. It would surprise me to find that the equal sharing of official leadership roles existed in history the majority of the time, but my knowledge of world history is spotty.

 

[IrisAlthea]

Your idea hinges a little on the meaning of "power." Influence is a form of power, and one can easily see how women, even in the most patriarchal society, employed tremendous power through their influence on many aspects of life, if not from most official roles in government or business.

Official roles as in cook being in charge of the kitchen, the houskeeper in charge of the house staff and the lady of the house in charge of running the whole household, ladies in waiting etc sure have existed in some form or other and the less official of being the Vicars wife, commanding officers wife etc did come with social duties that were considered.
In my parts of Europe the upper class ladies often did take over running the country estates when the men were off fighting somewhere.
Laws here also did grant women rather extensive rights when it came to inheritance and property ownership up until the mid eighteenth century or so when legislation was changed so husbands could easier access women’s property to be able to pay taxes and take credits with banks etc.

I’d say that these roles would entail about as much telling others what to do as modern day middle management and probably the same kind of ”joys” from their form of upper management.

Very few people exist outside a hierarchy and of those of us within one (or several), very few are at the absolute top or bottom.

 

[hrdmngd2find]

Official roles as in cook being in charge of the kitchen, the houskeeper in charge of the house staff and the lady of the house in charge of running the whole household, ladies in waiting etc sure have existed in some form or other and the less official of being the Vicars wife, commanding officers wife etc did come with social duties that were considered.
In my parts of Europe the upper class ladies often did take over running the country estates when the men were off fighting somewhere.
Laws here also did grant women rather extensive rights when it came to inheritance and property ownership up until the mid eighteenth century or so when legislation was changed so husbands could easier access women’s property to be able to pay taxes and take credits with banks etc.

I’d say that these roles would entail about as much telling others what to do as modern day middle management and probably the same kind of ”joys” from their form of upper management.

Very few people exist outside a hierarchy and of those of us within one (or several), very few are at the absolute top or bottom.

excellent points...

 

[slavemelanie]

I'm not sure it as much forcefully as it is not knowing where a session may go. The great unknow is a fabulous aphrodisiac. Add it some rough play and sensory deprevation and you have a delightful mix of conflicting emotions and anticipation. It has me tinging just imagining the vision . And really if you have few limits what are you being forced into?

 

[hrdmngd2find]

The great unknow is a fabulous aphrodisiac. Add it some rough play and sensory deprevation and you have a delightful mix of conflicting emotions and anticipation. It has me tinging just imagining the vision

..exactly why I like to put a blindfold on her.
At least in the beginning. I like to see her eyes too much to keep it on the whole time.

 

[CEOescape]

I've only met one man in my life who gave the forcefully-treated-sexually prospect a pass. Most people like letting the other person do the work of driving the encounter, getting them off, doing things *to* them. The fact that I enjoy doing the work as much as I do makes me a minority. The dirty secret isn't how many women like this (almost all do at some point) it's that almost all men do.

AS a woman i am more than surprised that the men feel this way also. I would not think the guys i have dated would submit like that..It is something i would have to see first hand to believe.