|

A
R A P E F A N T A S Y C A S E: The Case of Jan
A
clear example of the special difficulty women have with guilt
and sexual ruthlessness can be found in a closer study of the
case
of Jan, who required a fantasy of being sexually dominated by a
stranger in order to have an orgasm with her husband. Jan was
an
outspoken feminist who had, in fact, written numerous articles
that critiqued traditional sex roles. In her professional life,
she was
usually viewed as strong and outspoken, someone who, in her words,
didn't "take any shit." However, Jan's personal life
was unsatisfying. She tended to get involved with "nice
guys"
who initially seemed to be extremely sensitive to her needs, almost
maternal in their treatment of her. Her pattern was that she would
eventually lose interest in these men and become critical of them
as she began to experience their sensitivity and deference as
weakness.
Driven by her need for caretaking, she married one of them eventually
and was inevitably plagued by sexual boredom. As she began to
criticize
her husband, she would frequently experience his injured feelings
as a sign that he couldn't take care of himself. This made her
feel
guilty, "bitchy," an intolerable feeling that then led
her to criticize him more, all the while hoping for some way out
of this unhappy cycle. She hated being so critical, but didn't
want to be a typically deferential woman either. She felt pessimistic
and depressed about her capacity to love.
During a discussion
of her boredom, she first told me of the sexual fantasy that she
used in order to have an orgasm with her husband, a fantasy that
she'd used in some form since adolescence and that embarrassed
her. To Jan, it suggested that while she defended women by day,
by night she was a masochist, a pathetic woman who really wanted
to submit to male power. Nothing could have been farther from
the truth.
Jan told me
about her domination fantasy a little bit at a time, with many
stops and starts. When we put all the pieces together, it went
something like this:
"I sometimes
imagine that I'm sitting in my office, working diligently at my
computer. It's late and the building is empty. Suddenly my door
opens and a custodian enters, saying that he needs to empty the
wastebasket, which happens to be under my desk. I'm curt with
him and tell him to hurry up. I notice that he's quite big and
well-muscled under his uniform. As he reaches under my desk for
the wastebasket, he suddenly runs his hand up my leg, under my
skirt, and roughly squeezes my cunt. I start to resist. He grabs
my hands, holds them together over my head with one hand, and
with the other hand lifts me onto my desk, spreads my legs, and
rips off my panties. He tells me that he's wanted to fuck me for
along time. His cock is huge. His whole body is massive. He's
so strong that I can't move. He squeezes my tits hard. The thing
is, while he's fucking me, he isn't even looking at me. Sometimes
the scenario involves him grabbing my head and fucking my mouth.
Other times, it's my ass. But it's as if he has to not only have
a hard prick, he has to be a prick as a person. He has to not
give a shit about my pleasure but instead just use my body as
something to fuck and something to give him pleasure. He's exactly
the kind of asshole that I've hated my whole life and yet this
fantasy gets me so hot that I can reach orgasm with it in minutes."
The crude
and raunchy language that Jan used in recounting her fantasy conveyed
its essential meaning--namely, that what was happening had nothing
to do with tender feelings, love, or sensitivity. For her fantasy
to "work," the man had to be rough and insensitive --
no whispering sweet nothings, no eagerness to please, no concern
about whether the other person climaxed or not.
Why was this
so appealing to Jan? Why would a fantasy rape bring her to orgasm
while a real one would obviously traumatize her? Sometimes, Jan
would chalk it up to the effects of socialization--after all,
society teaches girls and women to be passive and masochistic--but
this offered her little comfort because she knew that there was
something more than simple social learning going on here. Was
she some kind of a masochist? Were her feminist opinions about
the importance of female empowerment simply defenses against her
private longings to be taken over by a powerful man? These were
the doubts that haunted Jan and made it difficult for her to reveal
and analyze her fantasy.
What Jan and
I learned was this: her deepest view of men was that they were,
as she put it, "paper tigers." Outwardly, men acted
macho and strong, but beneath this facade, men were really fragile
and insecure. We all have a basic image or belief system in our
minds, usually unconscious, about what constitutes a typical man
and woman, what goes into the formation of masculinity and femininity.
These beliefs are, to use computer language, "default"
beliefs, beliefs that the mind automatically returns to, unless
the person makes a conscious effort to override them. With effort,
we may develop other, more conscious and rational, beliefs about
masculinity and femininity, but there is always a pull back to
our original constructions. A man might consciously believe, for
example, that women like sex as much as men, while unconsciously
believing that they don't. Jan's primary construction of masculinity
was that it was hollow and weak. She unconsciously believed that
if she fully experienced and expressed her sexuality, most men
would feel threatened and overwhelmed. She chose kind and gentle
men as partners because they offered the promise of satisfying
other needs of hers, primarily needs to be loved and understood.
But these men frequently confirmed her view that men were weak
and unable to stand up for themselves, and would test them by
criticizing them. She secretly wanted them to assert themselves
and not be affected by her attacks. Instead, these men would often
get hurt. She would feel terribly guilty. The guiltier she felt,
the more she wanted them to stand up for themselves and not be
hurt by her, so she would up the ante and become even more "bitchy."
The cycle would escalate.
At one point,
I playfully suggested that she seemed to feel that a man would
have to be a giant in order to stand up to her. Immediately, Jan
recognized the implied reference to her sexual fantasy. Its function
became clear. She takes care of her problem of guilt by creating
a man so strong that she can't hurt him. She arranges for him
to be hurting her, not vice-versa. In so doing, Jan reassures
herself that she's not the destructive and powerfully ruthless
one---he is. No matter how strong she is, no matter how excited
she gets, no matter how out of control her impulses might be,
her fantasy partner will never become overwhelmed. Since he is
selfishly taking exactly what he wants, Jan can be confident that
he's happy and satisfied and she does not have to worry about
buoying him up. Her fantasy counteracts her pathogenic belief
that she overwhelms and hurts fragile men with her strength and
needs. He's taking what he wants, and so she can get what she
wants.
These discoveries
about the meaning of Jan's sexual fantasy helped her tremendously.
First of all, they helped reduce her shame; her fantasy didn't
mean that she was a secret masochist, but rather, that she felt
guilty about being too powerful. Second, Jan was now able to review
and revise her fundamental picture of men. Perhaps being sensitive
didn't necessarily mean that a man was weak. Perhaps a man could
be caring and still be strong enough to take care of her. And
finally, Jan was able to use her insights into her sexual conflicts
to feel less guilty about being strong with her husband and not
have to test him so frequently. She began enjoying him. She still
had sexual fantasies about being sexually dominated, although
they increasingly starred her husband as the dominator. In addition,
Jan could now sometimes allow herself to enjoy fantasies and scenarios
in which she was openly the aggressor.
Domination
fantasies frequently involve attempts to circumvent the chilling
effects of guilt and worry on sexual desire, certainly are prevalent
among both men and women, and obviously entail two roles in such
scenarios, the "top" and the "bottom." Fantasies
of being the dominator (or dominatrix) are also common. Perhaps
because our society tends generally to discourage public expressions
of aggression, self-assertion, and ruthlessness in women, it has
been my clinical experience that in the heterosexual world, the
submissive side of this type of sexual relationship seems to be
slightly more preferred by women, while the dominant role in the
fantasy seems to attract more men.
Jan's fantasy
is not uncommon among women. There are many variations on the
theme of a woman arranging a fantasy in which she can let go of
her inhibitions about being too strong. Though the manifest script
often puts her in a passive position, the underlying unconscious
message is that she is guilty about being too much for a weak,
limited, or inadequate man. Consider the following fantasy of
Gina's, a fantasy that she too uses to have an orgasm with her
sweet but boring husband:
"Fred
is a nice man, in and out of the bedroom. When we're screwing,
he always comes before I do. When I'm having sex with him and
want to make sure I cum, I will often have a fantasy in which
he takes me to a romantic and private spot in the woods and, to
my surprise, has arranged for his tennis buddies to meet us. Fred
tells me that they're going to 'wear me out.' They're all over
me, first one, then the other, taking turns fucking me. One will
play with my tits and make me jerk him off while the other eats
me out. Every hole gets filled up. I go wild and completely lose
control."
Gina felt
that in reality she wore Fred out, that he couldn't keep up with
her. To some extent, this was confirmed by his tendency to ejaculate
quickly, but it also reflected Gina's view of herself in relation
to men in general: that she overwhelmed them with her sexual energy.
Gina's guilt about being too strong in bed was perfectly counteracted
by a fantasy in which she finally meets her match in the form
of two men. The storyline of her fantasy seems to feature her
degradation--the men are going to "wear [her] out, "
she's being gang-banged, they "make" her jerk one of
them off--but the result is that Gina has an orgasm because, in
her unconscious reality, she finally has enough "man"
to fill her up and satisfy her. She is so sexually voracious that
it takes two of them to do the job.
As noted earlier,
even a casual perusal of the best-selling collections of sexual
fantasies by Nancy Friday provides lots of anecdotal evidence
of the relationship of guilt and worry to sexual arousal. Many
of Friday's respondents, women who sent her their sexual fantasies,
describe their daydreams in direct, coarse, and aggressive language.
The men and women who populate these fantasies get carried away
with their excitement and do so with exuberance, force, and lusty
aggression. Men "thrust with savage hardness," while
women ride their "cocks." These fantasies aren't Harlequin
romances in which sexual excitement is conveyed through a soft
focus. The ruthlessness of these fantasies is important because
it eliminates the need to feel guilty or worried. Everyone is
having fun, no one is fragile, and the result is sexual pleasure.
Having illustrated
common scenarios in which a woman uses a typically passive feminine
role to enact and fulfill her active and powerful sexual aims,
it needs to be said again that heterosexual gender roles do not
translate neatly into sexual fantasies. There are countless cases
in which the roles are reversed, situations in which the man wants
to surrender sexually to a woman, to be "done to," and
others in which women are aroused mainly by fantasies of explicitly
and aggressively sexually dominating a man. Gender differences,
though real, are not as profound as one might expect. The only
relevant question is: What pathogenic beliefs do dominance and
submission solve?
Since all
of us have pathogenic beliefs of some kind, and since all sexual
fantasies are attempts to correct such beliefs, we should not
conclude that analyzing fantasies necessarily means that they
are especially unhealthy. Sexual fantasies can and do have complicated
psychological meaning without being pathological.
When it comes
to its meaning, it doesn't matter if the scenario involves two
men, two women, or a man and a woman. Someone is dominant and
someone is submissive, regardless of gender or sexual orientation.
In any of these situations, both parties are getting aroused by
their respective roles. The point is to understand this arousal,
the centrality of guilt in the scenarios, and the psychologies,
not only of the one being "done," but also of the "doer."
|
|