Sexual interests?

[Penthesilea 0]

I made this account as a means to pose this particular sentiment in search of feed back. I felt the foreplay a making a first 'introductory' post would prove to be amusingly moot in manner to be revealed upon the reading of this post.

Recently, I have recognized a trend amongst many (not all) of my intellectual female equals. I also have a streak of this trend myself, which is essentially, a desire to be dominated in the Roark sort of way. The most interesting thing about this, is that the few men with whom I have spoken to on the matter seem much less interested, overall, in comparison to my female friends. Please do not misinterpret this as a controlled experiment or even a trend in common thinking. I am curious to know the thoughts of a larger base who may have the same understanding of the worship/power play of which I speak, which can't quite be said to be consensual, nor rape in a connotative manner.

What I seek is essentially: Your gender, your sexual orientation, your level of interest in the scenario, the role which you would desire in the scenario, and any other comments you may wish to share on the matter.

Appreciations!

[Stussy88 0]

I made this account as a means to pose this particular sentiment in search of feed back. I felt the foreplay a making a first 'introductory' post would prove to be amusingly moot in manner to be revealed upon the reading of this post.

Recently, I have recognized a trend amongst many (not all) of my intellectual female equals. I also have a streak of this trend myself, which is essentially, a desire to be dominated in the Roark sort of way. The most interesting thing about this, is that the few men with whom I have spoken to on the matter seem much less interested, overall, in comparison to my female friends. Please do not misinterpret this as a controlled experiment or even a trend in common thinking. I am curious to know the thoughts of a larger base who may have the same understanding of the worship/power play of which I speak, which can't quite be said to be consensual, nor rape in a connotative manner.

What I seek is essentially: Your gender, your sexual orientation, your level of interest in the scenario, the role which you would desire in the scenario, and any other comments you may wish to share on the matter.

Appreciations!

Male and straight, and very sorry to disappoint but if it's not consensual, then it is rape.

There is no middle ground. Now if it's an alpha male you are talking about that is entirely different.

[Tito 0]

I made this account as a means to pose this particular sentiment in search of feed back. I felt the foreplay a making a first 'introductory' post would prove to be amusingly moot in manner to be revealed upon the reading of this post.

Recently, I have recognized a trend amongst many (not all) of my intellectual female equals. I also have a streak of this trend myself, which is essentially, a desire to be dominated in the Roark sort of way. The most interesting thing about this, is that the few men with whom I have spoken to on the matter seem much less interested, overall, in comparison to my female friends. Please do not misinterpret this as a controlled experiment or even a trend in common thinking. I am curious to know the thoughts of a larger base who may have the same understanding of the worship/power play of which I speak, which can't quite be said to be consensual, nor rape in a connotative manner.

What I seek is essentially: Your gender, your sexual orientation, your level of interest in the scenario, the role which you would desire in the scenario, and any other comments you may wish to share on the matter.

Appreciations!

Male and straight, and very sorry to disappoint but if it's not consensual, then it is rape.

There is no middle ground. Now if it's an alpha male you are talking about that is entirely different.

Likewise, male and straight.

What about simulated resistance?

Haha, I've had some strange partners!

[Carlos 0]

You might be interested in looking at the thread "Rape Fantasies in Women".

[Tito 0]

You might be interested in looking at the thread "Rape Fantasies in Women".

The whole notion is quite ridiculous to me, I don't understand why someone would pretend something is above their choosing.

[Carlos 0]

You might be interested in looking at the thread "Rape Fantasies in Women".

The whole notion is quite ridiculous to me, I don't understand why someone would pretend something is above their choosing.

I honestly have no idea what you mean.

[egochick 0]

I made this account as a means to pose this particular sentiment in search of feed back. I felt the foreplay a making a first 'introductory' post would prove to be amusingly moot in manner to be revealed upon the reading of this post.

Recently, I have recognized a trend amongst many (not all) of my intellectual female equals. I also have a streak of this trend myself, which is essentially, a desire to be dominated in the Roark sort of way. The most interesting thing about this, is that the few men with whom I have spoken to on the matter seem much less interested, overall, in comparison to my female friends. Please do not misinterpret this as a controlled experiment or even a trend in common thinking. I am curious to know the thoughts of a larger base who may have the same understanding of the worship/power play of which I speak, which can't quite be said to be consensual, nor rape in a connotative manner.

What I seek is essentially: Your gender, your sexual orientation, your level of interest in the scenario, the role which you would desire in the scenario, and any other comments you may wish to share on the matter.

Appreciations!

Female, heterosexual.

Personally, I figure the desire for male dominance as a sort of heroine's challenge - a desire to meet an equal, for him to judge you as worthy as you do him. It's certainly not that one has to be a heroine in order to feel this desire, but a common desire for a hero. I'm not sure how it works for homosexual couples, but I figure attraction and love works the same way for everyone; everyone looks for their core values in their partner, whatever their values may be.

As an odd observation, perhaps relevant, my mother has been an avid romance reader since she was a girl and for a time, was also a writer. She told me that before the rise of the feminist movement, the Alpha male was very pronounced. Now, the usual hero is much more toned down. I'm not a romance reader myself, but I can see this same trend in movies. In the old James Bond movies, I see him being more than a little forceful with women - slapping the bad ones, being more sexually forward in general. Now there's not as much of either, and no witty, sexual comments about the collar matching the cuffs (Diamonds are Forever.) Because I grew up with racy stepback covers of Fabio-type guys and helpless women (which I don't see much of in bookstores any more), I wasn't the least bit disturbed or surprised by the sex scenes in the Fountainhead. I found it to be quite tasteful, but the point of the novel wasn't to be erotica.

I think I understand what you mean by not quite consensual and not rape. I always figured that it isn't rape if all parties consent. Because of the fuzzy, wide definition rape has now, is what you describe somewhere between "rape is non-consensual sex" and "consenting adults must sign a form before having sex so no one says 'rape' after the fact"? There are many more ways to consent than that. Consider an example of S/M or bondage - if everyone is a consenting adult, it's not rape but it is forceful sex.

I too am of the opinion that if it isn't consensual, then it is rape. However, I do believe that consent shouldn't have to be recorded in case someone changes their mind after the fact. Sexual decisions can be a mistake, but calling rape after consenting (even under the influence of *voluntarily* ingested drugs) just isn't fair.

[Tito 0]

You might be interested in looking at the thread "Rape Fantasies in Women".

The whole notion is quite ridiculous to me, I don't understand why someone would pretend something is above their choosing.

I honestly have no idea what you mean.

The notion of rape fantasies.

Ah well, this is why it makes sense to keep out of other people's bedrooms!

[bborg 0]

Well, honestly I don't understand the idea of dominance and submission or "power play". What is it you are dominating or submitting to?

[Tito 0]

Well, honestly I don't understand the idea of dominance and submission or "power play". What is it you are dominating or submitting to?

Whim.

[bborg 0]

Well, honestly I don't understand the idea of dominance and submission or "power play". What is it you are dominating or submitting to?

Whim.

Um...huh?

[Tito 0]

Well, honestly I don't understand the idea of dominance and submission or "power play". What is it you are dominating or submitting to?

Whim.

Um...huh?

What else could it be? Maybe the original poster has some enlightenment.

[Betsy Speicher 0]

You might be interested in looking at the thread "Rape Fantasies in Women".

You'll find that thread here.

It's not that men should be dominant. Men are dominant in sex simply because A is A. Without his desire to initiate and sustain it, there won't be a sexual relationship at all. That's a simple biological fact with major psychological consequences, especially for women.

I'm female and hetero and male dominance is a fact I not only accept but also delight in. Like most women, I have found that surrendering, letting go, and letting a man I love and trust take control is the way to the greatest sexual fulfillment for me.

[Penthesilea 0]

Busy bees indeed! Unfortunately, this is finals week, so my bee-like activities are devoted elsewhere.

Stussy88:

“Male and straight, and very sorry to disappoint but if it's not consensual, then it is rape. There is no middle ground. Now if it's an alpha male you are talking about that is entirely different.”

You didn't disappoint, you actually managed to answer my question! However. I believe you did misread me. I am not claiming that what I am talking about isn't rape, I simply stated that it isn't rape in the connotative sense. As far as denotation, well yeah of course. Also, I didn't mean to imply that I wanted this, more over that I am somewhat confused as to seemingly counter-intuitive data.

Tito:

“What about simulated resistance?”

No. It's not that I wish to act this out, namely because I don't believe in the sort of “at first sight” understanding of another's soul which would be implicit in the nature of what Ayn Rand was talking about actually exists. Also, any kind of role playing makes me laugh my ass off, I can't help but feel like I'm on some cheesy, fake-ass, Mexican soap opera.

EgoChick:

“Personally, I figure the desire for male dominance as a sort of heroine's challenge - a desire to meet an equal, for him to judge you as worthy as you do him.”

This is well put and in many ways is what I'm talking about. For me, it is the comparison of equals on two levels that I find appealing, the way Ayn Rand writes its (also as I read it), I feel it is more about a woman making use of her sexual power in a manner to force a man to use his physical power to prove himself as her equal.

“She told me that before the rise of the feminist movement, the Alpha male was very pronounced. Now, the usual hero is much more toned down. ”

I hadn't really though about this in application to my problem. I find it interesting and am currently musing that perhaps through the feminist movement the women who were turned on by being dominated were dismissed in favor of those who's fancy may lean more toward dominating? I definitely do not feel that every woman wants to be dominated in some way, in fact quite the contrary I think that it is likely that just as many women wish to dominate than to be dominated, I just wonder how many other women feel so embarrassed about their inner desires because of this turn in media.

Tito:

“Whim.”

Ha, I love how much thought you put into this.

[Betsy Speicher 0]

You might be interested in looking at the thread "Rape Fantasies in Women".

The whole notion is quite ridiculous to me, I don't understand why someone would pretend something is above their choosing.

I realize it is not something most guys can identify with simply because it involves aspects of uniquely feminine psychology. I have written several short articles explaining this in terms most men understand. Send an email to betsy@speicher.com requesting my "Femininity Essays" and I'll send them to you.

[Betsy Speicher 0]

Well, honestly I don't understand the idea of dominance and submission or "power play". What is it you are dominating or submitting to?

Sex is a joint physical activity, like dancing, and both participants can't "lead." It so happens that sexually, nature made man the "leader" and women seemed to have evolved to like it that way.

[pkrembs 0]

What I seek is essentially: Your gender, your sexual orientation, your level of interest in the scenario, the role which you would desire in the scenario, and any other comments you may wish to share on the matter.

Appreciations!

Male, gay, no interest in this type of scenario whatsoever. Sex is a great physical and emotional experience, and it's also a very personally nuanced one. I have zero inclination in aspiring toward Ayn Rand's model of sexual roles. I find the greatest satisfaction (and indeed this may be different for homosexual relations) in sex when it is approached as willing (heh, sometimes more than willing) partners.

[JRoberts 0]

Male, gay, no interest in this type of scenario whatsoever. Sex is a great physical and emotional experience, and it's also a very personally nuanced one. I have zero inclination in aspiring toward Ayn Rand's model of sexual roles. I find the greatest satisfaction (and indeed this may be different for homosexual relations) in sex when it is approached as willing (heh, sometimes more than willing) partners.

I think that you have to remember that Ayn Rand was writing about sex as it applies to "natural" people (which is indeed heterosexuality). Homosexuality, as by their own nature different than the general nature of mankind, has a different psychology when it comes to sex than heterosexual relationships. For this reason, it is not at all wrong to not aspire towards Ayn Rand's descriptions of sex...roles. But her principles of sexuality remain the same, regardless of your orientation.

[JRoberts 0]

I think that you have to remember that Ayn Rand was writing about sex as it applies to "natural" people (which is indeed heterosexuality). Homosexuality, as by their own nature different than the general nature of mankind, has a different psychology when it comes to sex than heterosexual relationships. For this reason, it is not at all wrong to not aspire towards Ayn Rand's descriptions of sex...roles. But her principles of sexuality remain the same, regardless of your orientation.

I just realized that I added a "necessary" double negative in this sentence. Damn English and its "double negative" rule!

I should have said, "...it would not be wrong to aspire towards a sexual role different than the ones described by Ayn Rand." Sorry if that added any confusion .

[pkrembs 0]

Male, gay, no interest in this type of scenario whatsoever. Sex is a great physical and emotional experience, and it's also a very personally nuanced one. I have zero inclination in aspiring toward Ayn Rand's model of sexual roles. I find the greatest satisfaction (and indeed this may be different for homosexual relations) in sex when it is approached as willing (heh, sometimes more than willing) partners.

I think that you have to remember that Ayn Rand was writing about sex as it applies to "natural" people (which is indeed heterosexuality). Homosexuality, as by their own nature different than the general nature of mankind, has a different psychology when it comes to sex than heterosexual relationships. For this reason, it is not at all wrong to not aspire towards Ayn Rand's descriptions of sex...roles. But her principles of sexuality remain the same, regardless of your orientation.

I do not agree with the implication that homosexuality is "unnatural." A minority inclination, perhaps, but it is still a result of naturalistic forces that an appreciable group of humans on every continent (and animals on all) have a biochemistry that predisposes them to same-sex attraction.

I was aware that Rand had in mind heterosexual relations when she wrote those works, but I still must admit that even if I were straight, her model would still not appeal to me, although, to clarify: I never said that aspiring to Rand's ideas on sex was wrong; it's just not something that particularly interests me.

[dondigitalia 0]

I think that you have to remember that Ayn Rand was writing about sex as it applies to "natural" people (which is indeed heterosexuality). Homosexuality, as by their own nature different than the general nature of mankind, has a different psychology when it comes to sex than heterosexual relationships. For this reason, it is not at all wrong to not aspire towards Ayn Rand's descriptions of sex...roles. But her principles of sexuality remain the same, regardless of your orientation.

Homosexual relationships are very different from straight relationships. Not just because I have found my homosexual relationships to be by far better than the straight ones I used to have back in the day; they're actually much different in kind. And I've seen many gay relationships where the couple adopts roles very similar to Ayn Rand's model. I'm curious as to what you mean by "natural" and why you consider one sort of sexuality natural, but not another. I recognize that there are significant difference in the way homosexuals relate to one another that go beyond other sorts of sexual preferences/idiosyncrasies, but how does that difference make it unnatural, whereas having a preference for a particular race or body type is not unnatural?

As you know, I am completely confused by Ayn Rand's theory of sex; anything beyond "it's good" goes totally over my head. I would never in a million years think to describe it the way she did. I'm not saying I think she's wrong necessarily; I just quite frankly don't have a clue what any of it really means. It's just a bunch of floating abstractions in my mind that I can regurgitate when asked to summarize her view.

That said, I'm with Peter when he says he has no desire to settle into the "roles" she described. I think this is mostly a psychological issue she was addressing, though, rather than a philosophic one.

[dondigitalia 0]

I realize it is not something most guys can identify with simply because it involves aspects of uniquely feminine psychology. I have written several short articles explaining this in terms most men understand. Send an email to betsy@speicher.com requesting my "Femininity Essays" and I'll send them to you.

I'd like them, Betsy. I'll e-mail you also to request them. I've been thinking about this topic a lot this week (it's what we're working on in OAC right now), and have come to the conclusion that the reason I don't understand what Ayn Rand is talking about when she talks about sex is that the way she (and all women, I think, from my discussions with them) experiences it is vastly different from the way I do.

[Scott A. 0]

I do not agree with the implication that homosexuality is "unnatural." A minority inclination, perhaps, but it is still a result of naturalistic forces that an appreciable group of humans on every continent (and animals on all) have a biochemistry that predisposes them to same-sex attraction.

The issue of the existence of biochemistry that predisposes one to homosexuality is far from settled. My personal opinion is that it probably exists, to some extent, in a majority of gay people, but not all. For a very interesting article and related discussion of this topic, I refer you to this thread on THE FORUM. That might be a better place to discuss this issue, as it veers from the original topic of this thread (or you could start a new thread).

[Scott A. 0]

Homosexuality, as by their own nature different than the general nature of mankind, has a different psychology when it comes to sex than heterosexual relationships.

Could you please further explain what you mean by "Homosexuality, as by their own nature different than the general nature of mankind..." I thought reason and rationality were the core features of man's nature, not sexual orientation.

Could you also please describe the difference(s) between homosexual and heterosexual psychology in regard to sex?

(As I wrote in the previous post, perhaps this discussion should be in a different or new thread.)

[Stussy88 0]

Busy bees indeed! Unfortunately, this is finals week, so my bee-like activities are devoted elsewhere.

Stussy88:

“Male and straight, and very sorry to disappoint but if it's not consensual, then it is rape. There is no middle ground. Now if it's an alpha male you are talking about that is entirely different.”

You didn't disappoint, you actually managed to answer my question! However. I believe you did misread me. I am not claiming that what I am talking about isn't rape, I simply stated that it isn't rape in the connotative sense. As far as denotation, well yeah of course. Also, I didn't mean to imply that I wanted this, more over that I am somewhat confused as to seemingly counter-intuitive data.

Tito:

“What about simulated resistance?”

No. It's not that I wish to act this out, namely because I don't believe in the sort of “at first sight” understanding of another's soul which would be implicit in the nature of what Ayn Rand was talking about actually exists. Also, any kind of role playing makes me laugh my ass off, I can't help but feel like I'm on some cheesy, fake-ass, Mexican soap opera.

EgoChick:

“Personally, I figure the desire for male dominance as a sort of heroine's challenge - a desire to meet an equal, for him to judge you as worthy as you do him.”

This is well put and in many ways is what I'm talking about. For me, it is the comparison of equals on two levels that I find appealing, the way Ayn Rand writes its (also as I read it), I feel it is more about a woman making use of her sexual power in a manner to force a man to use his physical power to prove himself as her equal.

“She told me that before the rise of the feminist movement, the Alpha male was very pronounced. Now, the usual hero is much more toned down. ”

I hadn't really though about this in application to my problem. I find it interesting and am currently musing that perhaps through the feminist movement the women who were turned on by being dominated were dismissed in favor of those who's fancy may lean more toward dominating? I definitely do not feel that every woman wants to be dominated in some way, in fact quite the contrary I think that it is likely that just as many women wish to dominate than to be dominated, I just wonder how many other women feel so embarrassed about their inner desires because of this turn in media.

Tito:

“Whim.”

Ha, I love how much thought you put into this.

Okay you've got me, I can't understand what you mean by the connotative sense, (i.e. the secondary meaning of a word) Is there a secondary or associated meaning to rape that I am not seeing?