Women Being Dominated

🛑 ALL INFORMATION CLICK HERE 👈🏻👈🏻👈🏻

Women Being Dominated
The Psychology Behind Submissive Fantasies: Do Women REALLY Want To Be Ravished?
The content you see here is paid for by the advertiser or content provider whose link you click on, and is recommended to you by Revcontent. As the leading platform for native advertising and content recommendation, Revcontent uses interest based targeting to select content that we think will be of particular interest to you. We encourage you to view your opt out options in Revcontent's Privacy Policy
Want your content to appear on sites like this? Increase Your Engagement Now!
Want to report this publisher's content as misinformation? Submit a Report
By Adam Sheck — Written on May 19, 2017
As a psychologist and couples counselor, I’ve been asked this question by men, women, and couples for the last twenty years. My specialty is helping couples bring back the passion in their relationship and using fantasy is one way of doing this .
And the fantasy of being ravished, being lovingly, yet forcefully taken by her man is consistently in the top five female fantasies, often the number one fantasy. This is different than the “rape fantasy” which has often been misrepresented .
Of course, women don’t want to be raped; this is an act of violence and power, not one of love . However, as revealed in the always popular romance novels, the fantasy of a strong, powerful man initiating sex with a woman, not accepting her initial reluctance, and then loving her passionately, is a popular fantasy. This is not about abuse and power, as in most of these novels (and fantasies), the couple ends up married and living “happily ever after.”
So what’s the truth here, at least from a psychological perspective? When we first meet someone we’re attracted to we experience that initial chemistry and go into that “honeymoon” period, where our bodies are flooded with chemicals and we are “walking hormones.” 
However, this initial chemistry fades over time and we need to take steps to reignite it! To create sexual passion , there needs to be sexual tension and for this, there needs to be strong sexual polarity. We need to consciously create this in our relationship.
Polarity comes from strong masculine energy meeting strong feminine energy. Just like the positive and negative terminals of a battery create electricity, so will the masculine and feminine interact to create passion! Now each of us, male and female have an inner masculine and an inner feminine and either sex can express either aspect.
For the heterosexual female “ravish me” fantasy though, we’re talking about the man embodying the masculine and taking charge with those masculine qualities to be focused, direct, relentless in pursuing his goal, in this case, loving his woman into “submission.” This can range from simply initiating sex, to be a little more assertive than usual, to being more aggressive, to being a little “rough,” all the way to role play and using restraints and sex toys .
To use a simple example, I’m 6’3" and over 200 pounds and have found that many woman have simply enjoyed the weight of my body pressing into them and found that arousing. Perhaps that is enough to begin your journey. I also happen to have large hands (no euphemism here). I’m usually able to hold both of a woman’s wrists in one of my hands and even that small step can often be assertive enough to feed into the submission fantasy. Just consider what YOU can do to orient yourself in that direction, it doesn’t have to be “whips and chains.”
From an evolutionary psychology perspective, women want to know that their man can take care of them, can “hold” them, both emotionally AND physically.
I have a female friend who is close to six feet tall and she LOVES that her husband can physically hold her, pick her up, engulf her and make her feel like she’s a little girl sometimes.
If we believe that “form follows function” than if a man can open a woman sexually with his dominance than perhaps he can also metaphorically open her heart with his dominance. Perhaps there is part of each woman who wants to have her heart ravaged open, even more than her body? Don’t we all want our partner to help open our heart and experience more love?
Now on the flip side, there are times when a man enjoys his partner initiating sex in a more dominant and aggressive way as well. Being stuck in ANY role will ultimately diminish passion. We need to mix it up. But that’s a topic for another day
These are my thoughts about this question, “Do women want to be submissive?” I would love to hear your thoughts and comments about this and any other ideas for bringing back the passion in relationships.
If this article interested you and you’d like to find out more ways to bring the passion back in your relationship, please go to www.freepassiontips.com to receive my monthly newsletter as well as my Special Report, “20 Rituals for Romance!” 
This article was originally published at passion101.com . Reprinted with permission from the author.
The content produced by YourTango is for informational and educational purposes only. Our website services, content and products are not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Please consult your doctor before taking any action. See additional information
© 2022 by Tango Publishing Corporation All Rights Reserved.

The Washington Post Democracy Dies in Darkness
Study: Up to 60 percent of women fantasize about ‘being dominated’
61.2 percent of men had fantasized about interracial sex; just 27.5 percent of women had 57.0 percent of men had fantasized about having sex with someone much younger; just 18.1 percent of women had 56.5 of women surveyed had fantasized about having sex with more than three people, both men and women; just 15.8 percent of men had 64.6 percent of women had fantasized about “being dominated sexually”; 53.3 percent of men had
Make time for stories that embrace nuance and complexity. Some will break your heart, others will enlighten you.
He was one of the nation’s most revered gay cops. His arrest changed everything.
Neil Gaiman’s Books Have Enchanted Millions. Finally, Hollywood Is on Board.
A more perfect Union tears D.C. United apart with a record rout
Sign in or create a free account to save your preferences
washingtonpost.com © 1996-2022 The Washington Post
This article was published more than 8 years ago
Depending on the decade, some sexual fantasies have been considered unusual by psychiatrists. Among those listed in the fifth edition of “The Diagnostic and Statisical Manual of Mental Disorders:” masochism, exhibitionism, transvestism and pedophilia.
But how rare are fantasies considered unusual — or otherwise stigmatized? A team from the department of psychology at the University of Quebec at Trois-Rivières decided to find out.
“Although several theories and treatment plans use unusual sexual fantasies (SF) as a way to identify deviancy, they seldom describe how the fantasies referred to were determined to be usual,” a team led by Christian C. Joyal wrote in “What Exactly is an Unusual Sexual Fantasy?,” forthcoming in the Journal of Sexual Medicine . “The main goal of this study was to determine which SF are rare, unusual, common, or typical from a statistical point of view.”
To achieve this goal, the team asked more than 1,500 college students to rank 55 sexual fantasies and describe their own favorite. Example: The top-ranked fantasy was “I like to feel romantic emotions during a sexual relationship.” Among women surveyed, 92.2 percent shared this fantasy; among men, 88.3 percent. On the low end of the spectrum, fewer than 1 percent of women had fantasized about having sex with a child under 12 years old; among men, 1.8 percent had.
In between these two extremes were some interesting findings. Among those printable in a family newspaper:
The authors of the study seemed particularly interested in findings that supported the popularity of “Fifty Shades of Grey.”
“Among women, it was found that SF of being dominated, being spanked or whipped, being tied up, and being forced to have sex were reported by 30%-60%,” according to the study. ” … The fantasy of being dominated was significantly greater for women than for men, on average, whereas the fantasy of dominating was statistically stronger for men than for women, on average.”
One caveat: This was a survey of Canadians 18 to 65. Presumably surveys of residents of a retirement community or a devout churchgoers would produce different responses. Another: Those who volunteer to participate in sex studies tend to be more sexually experienced. Or, as the authors put it: “This sample was not representative of the general population.”
Also, there is a difference between fantasy and reality.
“The majority of our female participants with masochistic fantasies specified they would NOT want to live it,” lead author Christian Joyal wrote in an e-mail to The Washington Post.
Still, researchers suggested many sexual fantasies are common, and that even those considered strange should not be singled out unless they have negative effects.
“Clinicians and researchers should not rely solely on the theme of a sexual fantasy to determine if it is either pathological or unusual,” according to the study. ” … Care should be taken before labeling an SF as unusual, let alone deviant.”
The researchers said consent was vital to differentiating between deviant behaviors and merely unusual ones.
“Although a pathological sex fantasy is easy to diagnose (e.g. involving non consenting persons, inducing psychological suffering to the person),” Joyal wrote, “we think there is no need to chose specific themes, no need to stigmatize interests toward consenting adults, and an important need to base diagnosis on evidence-based data.”

Sorry, the browser you are using is no longer supported by Shutterstock. Please upgrade your browser to continue.
"dominant woman" royalty-free images 29,614 "dominant woman" stock photos, vectors, and illustrations are available royalty-free. See "dominant woman" stock video clips

See the article in its original context from November 13, 1977 , Section SM , Page 13 Buy Reprints
TimesMachine is an exclusive benefit for home delivery and digital subscribers.
This is a digitized version of an article from The Times’s print archive, before the start of online publication in 1996. To preserve these articles as they originally appeared, The Times does not alter, edit or update them.
Occasionally the digitization process introduces transcription errors or other problems; we are continuing to work to improve these archived versions.
As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give each month. Anyone can read what you share.
There is not a single country in the world today whose top political position is held by a woman. Although, during the last decade, women have entered fields previously barred to them, men still monopolize the key positions in government, industry and military institutions. The questions remain: Are there innate biological harriers that prevent women trom attaining equal power? Or, is there something built into the human male that makes it more natural for him to command females than for females to command him? To answer, one must know why male supremacism has been so well‐nigh universal.
Feminists actually tend to underestimate male supremacism. They are afraid, for one thing, that, if it has been in continuous existence throughout virtually the entire globe from the earliest times to the present, then perhaps it really is natural for men to dominate women. Some radical feminists conclude that their txxlies are at fault and that women will not achieve parity unless they cease to bear children. True liberation, according to Shulamith Firestone, for example, will come only when babies are manufactured in bottles. (By bionic superfemales, perhaps?)
In all their eagerness to disprove the universality of male dominance, several feminists have attempted to resurrect semitnystical theories about a golden age of “matriarchy” when women reigned supreme over men. Yet nothing justifies the exhumation of this 19th‐century corpse. Not tr shred of evidence, hisforicol or contemporary, supports the existence of a single society in which women controlled the political and economic lives of men.
Other feminists have recently insisted that the reported high incidence of male supremacist institutions is an illusion created by the sexist minds of male anthropologists. But this idea is based on a lack of understanding of the real prejudice that does exist among
Marvin Hams, a Columbia University anthropologist, is the author of recently published “Cannibals and Kings.” anthropological fiehlworkers, male or female. They suffer from the temptation to claim that they have lived among groups whose customs are not to he found anywhere else. Far from wanting to overlook it, most of my male colleagues would jump at the opportunity to write journal articles, for example, about domineering matrons, or harems of male concubines. Knowing this about the state of the art, I find it impossible to believe that the widely reported cultural biases against women are mere motes in the eyes of male fieldworkers.
Many feminists argue that the sexes were equal when people lived in villages or small mobile groups called bands, prior to the development of the state. It is true that anthropological studies of contemporary band and village peoples do not always indicate the presence of strong male‐supremacist institutions. But most of this anthropological fieldwork was carried out after warfare was suppressed by colonial authorities and thus may lead to false inferences.
From the analysis of large representative samples of all the human societies studied by anthropologists, 1 find overwhelming evidence that males control females in most domains of social life. For example, in 75 percent of these societies, the bride must move from her own family to that of her husband's, while the opposite pattern prevails in only 10 percent of the marriages. This shift in residence immediately places the bride at a disadvantage; it is she who must adapt to life in a strange household often far from supportive parents and siblings.
Lines tracing family ancestry show the same asymmetry. Children are linked with their ancestors exclusively through males at least five times more often than they are linked exclusively through females. But even in cultures where descent is in the maternal line, married children remain with their mothers in only about a third of the cases. In another third, male children stop living with their mother and take residence in their mother's brother's household, bringing their wives with them. This pattern implies that it is the mother's brother who controls the domestic scene even though descent is in the female line. Remarkably, not a single case of the opposite of this pattern—the conferring of control on the father's sister in a society which reckons descent paternally—has ever been identified.
Patterns of plural marriage also overwhelmingly attest to the dominance of males. Men are polygamous a hundred times more frequently than women are. Furthermore, the transfer of valuables from the groom's family to the bride's is extremely common. This transfer compensates the menfolk for the loss of her valuable services. A striking fact is that In all the anthropological literature only one or two cases are known of economic compensation given by the bride's sisters and mother to the groom's sisters and mother for loss of the groom's valuable productive and reproductive services. In other words, marriage usually involves the exchange of women between groups of men; seldom, if ever, the exchange of men between groups of women.
Political institutions show the same lopsided quality. Headmen rather than headwomen are the rule; as are male chiefs rather than female chiefs. In matters religious, it is the same story: Shamans—persons possessing privileged access to the realm of supernatural beings through trances, dreams and drug‐induced hallucinations—are far more often reported as men than as women. In addition, the members of the majority of band and village societies regard women as ritually unclean, especially during menstruation. They believe menstrual blood pollutes. But they use semen in rituals aimed at improving the group's health and well‐being. Throughout the world, men menace women and children with noisemakers, masks and other sacred objects whose true nature is kept as a male secret. Men's clubhouses, in which these items are stored and from which women are excluded, are also part of the same complex. Women on the other hand, seldom ritually menace men; there are no women's houses where they gather to protect themselves against the pollution given off
Male dominance also shows up in the division of economic tasks. In almost all band and village societies, women do the drudge work, such as weeding, seed grinding, fetching water and firewood, carrying infants and household possessions and routine cooking.
The appropriate response to this preoccupying fact of past and present male dominance does not, of course, lie in rewriting prehistory, or in mythology, or in test‐tube babies or attacks on male anthropologists. Rather what is called for is an investigation of the cultural conditions that have nurtured and sustained male sexism. Like most advocates of women's rights, I do not hold to the theory that men dominate women because it is natural for them to be aggressive and take control. Male supremacy is not a biological imperative or a genetically programmed characteristic of the human species. Nor is it an arbitrary social convention or a conspiracy among males to degrade or exploit women, as many radical feminists believe.
Theoreticians of the women's movement have written volumes on the subject, but they have either ignored or misunderstood the crucial factors that led to male dominance. Far from being arbitrary or conspiratorial, male chauvinism arose during prehistory to counter a basic threat to human survival— the threat of overpopulation and the depletion of resources. Furthermore, my research has convinced me that the patterns of early human sexism cannot be understood without investigating the origin of another scourge—warfare. My theory holds that male supremacy and prehistoric warfare together constituted the core of a primordial system for avoiding the misery and annihilation latent in the reproductive power of the
What recent feminist writers have failed to realize is that this entire complex of male supremacism, plus the very definition of “feminine” as passive and “masculine” as aggressive, can be deduced from one fact: Virtually all band and village societies engaged in warfare in which males were the principal if not exclusive combatants. Throughout prehistory as well as during more recent epochs, warriors fought battles exclusively with spears, clubs, bows and arrows and other musclepowered weapons. Under these conditions, the greater average strength and height of the human male—which can be traced back to our primate ancestry—became critically important. Military success, and hence the life and death of whole communities, depended on the relative number of aggressive brawny men who were psychologically and physically prepared to risk their lives in combat. In preparation for their combat roles, males were taught competitive sports such as wrestling, dueling with spears and racing with heavy weights. Masculinity was also instilled by subjecting boys to intense physical ordeals such as circumcision, trials of stamina, deprivation of food and drink, and drug‐induced hallucinatory encounters with supernatural monsters. To get males to risk their comfort and their lives in behalf of perfecting powerful
Femdom Feminization Stories
Hot Teen Butt
Happy Birthday Bondage