Double Bind Dilemmas for Women in Leadership

Double Bind Dilemmas for Women in Leadership

by | Jul 27, 2020 | Gender Politics, Women's Issues

On July 20, Republican Representative Ted Yoho called Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez “disgusting” and a “fucking bitch” on the steps of the U.S. Capitol. Ocasio-Cortez eloquently rebutted Yoho on the House floor saying, “This issue is not about one incident. This is not new. And that is the problem. It is cultural. It is a culture of lack of impunity, of accepting violence and violent language against women and an entire structure of power than supports that.”

When Carol Moseley-Braun was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1992, she was the first female African American senator. As she recounted to listeners of NPR’s Hidden Brain in 2016, Braun assumed that racism would be a more formidable obstacle to her success as a U.S. Senator than gender bias. But that is not what happened.

When Braun made impassioned pleas on the floor of the Senate supporting her positions for voting rights and gun control (to name a few), all her male colleagues heard was the voice of a shrill black woman — at least that was the disappointing and humiliating narrative Braun felt in her soul.

“I think in some regards the gender biases are more profound and more central to our culture than even the racial ones, and that to me was a surprise,” she said.

Damned if You Do, Damned (or doomed) if you Don’t

I have described potential double binds in the context of women’s mating strategies in Double Binds Imposed on Men.

But what about the double binds that women face?

Women face double binds that involve the biological, evolutionary, and cultural application of mate selection and relationship dynamics. (See chart at end of post.) I will address them another time. For now – let’s address a pressing concern: There are double binds facing women in American leadership.

Caution Ahead

Braun’s experience was a cautionary tale. Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential candidacy appeared to underscore the problem. Leaders must sometimes be strong, tough, assertive, and decisive. Yet women leaders are expected to be accommodating and likable (even sweet), and never shrill, abrasive, or angry. This is an untenable dilemma.

The double bind that challenges women in political and corporate leadership affects all of us. It not only impedes the advancement and service of individual women, but it also reduces our nation’s capacity for problem-solving, policymaking, and innovation. Women leaders in politics and business bring sensitivities, interests, and emotional intelligence that improve our decision-making and enhances our health and cultural well-being.

There are evolutionary roots to this double bind. They include sex differences, preferences for spheres of influence (group systems vs. family), and adaptations for the division of labor.1 But we can and must move beyond the “shadow” of our evolutionary causations in order to secure the future health of American democracy.

 

Biases that Women Face – Embedded Societal Expectations

A Pew Research Center study (2017) asked people: “what traits or characteristics do you think society values most in women and in men?” Respondents said men were valued (in rank order) for their honesty and morality (33%), professional and financial success (23%), ambition and leadership (19%), strength and toughness (19%), hard work (18%), and physical attractiveness (11%). Women were valued for their physical attractiveness (35%), empathy, nurturing and kindness (30%), intelligence (22%), honesty and morality (14%), ambition and leadership (9%), and only 5% for strength and toughness. Notably, when asked what trait women should not have, 28% of respondents mentioned traits related to ambition, leadership and assertiveness, far more than any other trait or characteristic.

These are very strong headwaters of bias to swim against for women aspiring to and serving in leadership roles.

 

Research on Gender Stereotypes

Research by Madeline Heilman (Professor of Psychology, New York University) focuses on gender stereotypes and bias, particularly when it comes to leadership. In one study, Heilman asked volunteers to evaluate a high-powered manager who was coming into a company. When the candidate was presented as a very ambitious and high-powered women, the person was seen as unlikeable; but not so when the very same person was presented as a man. Heilman says “we have conceptions about these jobs and these positions and what is required to do them well, and there’s a lack of fit between how we see women and what these positions require.” Double binds arise in our minds because our minds are trying to align our stereotypes about men and women with our stereotypes about leadership.

These biases are not just held by men. They are held by both sexes, which explains why female leaders encounter derision and suspicion from both men and women.

 

Gender Attributions about Emotions

Researcher Lisa Feldman-Barrett at Northeastern University (How Emotions Are Made, 2017) had subjects look at faces of men and women and assess their emotions and the context of that emotion. When looking at male faces expressing emotion, respondents said the man was just having a bad day – or something bad had happened to him. Whereas, when women expressed emotion, they were described as neurotic or unstable. Men’s emotions were attributed to what was going on around them, but women’s emotions were seen as shaped “by their nature.”

Feldman-Barrett found that if women expressed too much emotion, they were seen as unsuitable for leadership or unstable in some way. Emotional men were seen as mostly rational or level-headed. But if a woman did not express enough emotion, they were seen as not warm, empathetic, or trustworthy (the “Hillary effect”). Apparently, a woman can get in trouble for expressing emotion and for not expressing emotion. This is a toxic double bind.

 

“Women Take Care and Men Take Charge” — Redefining Leadership Itself

Although the Pew survey results align with an understanding of biological sex differences and mate selection trait preferences, what is “natural” is not necessarily good for us. Even if gender stereotypes have a deep evolutionary past, they cause no win-situations for women leaders in our present-day politics, and that hurts all of us.

“The female gender role is based on the stereotype that women are nice and kind and compassionate,” says social psychologist, Alice Eagly (Through the Labyrinth: The Truth About How Women Become Leaders, 2007). By contrast, “in a leadership role, one is expected to take charge and sometimes demonstrate toughness – make tough decisions and be assertive in moving the organization forward, and sometimes fire people for cause.” The good news, says Eagly, is that our views of men and women are changing, and our ideas about the meaning of leadership are changing.

Indeed, it is time to redefine what it means to be a leader in the American political arena. The less we see leaders as alpha males, the easier it will be to see women as leaders. Fortunately, that redefinition has been going on in the corporate world for many years.

 

Three Predicaments

Catalyst2 is an organization that supports “workplaces that work for women.” They have identified three “predicaments” (double bind dilemmas) that women leaders face:

1. Extreme perceptions: too soft, too tough, and never just right. When women act in ways that are consistent with gender stereotypes, they are viewed as less competent leaders (too soft). When women act in ways that are inconsistent with such stereotypes, they’re considered unfeminine (too tough).

2. High competence threshold: Women leaders face higher standards and lower rewards than male leaders. Women have to prove they can lead over and over again and constantly manage stereotypical expectations.

3. Competent but disliked: Women leaders are perceived as competent or likable, but rarely both.

 

The Hillary Trifecta

Hillary Clinton embodied all three predicaments. She was seen as shrill, cold, and not emotional. (But not in private.) The standards for judging her performance as Senator and Secretary of State were always very high. And her competence, while arguably beyond reproach, made her somehow unlikeable. From the seven-minute standing ovation she received as the first student to speak at a Wellesley College commencement, Hillary had the additional problem of being one of the first women of her generation to break with the traditional role of wife. She was the first First Lady to have an office in the West Wing of the White House.

 

Strategies to Dismantle the Leadership Double Bind

Catalyst suggests three strategies for dismantling the women’s leadership double bind:

1. Interrupt bias. Speak up if you hear colleagues use words that reinforce negative gender stereotypes such as, “she is abrasive”,” “she is so emotional,” or “she talks too much.” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez spoke up.

2. Use the same standard for women and men when evaluating employees. Reverse the gender of the person you are evaluating to see if it makes a difference in your language or assessment.

3. Be a visible champion. Promote the accomplishments of women and actively advocate for their development and advancement, thus serving as a role model for others to do the same.

 

Redefining Leadership is Actually Old News

The field of organizational development has been redefining leadership for 50 years. Beginning in 1970 with the ground-breaking Center for Creative Leadership, the field gained momentum with such landmark books (and practices) as Peter Senge’s The Fifth Discipline (1990), Roger Schwartz’ The Skilled Facilitator (1994), and William Isaacs’ Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together (1999). The science and art of participatory decision making and teamwork has been clear in its message: the process of generating information and making decisions (process leadership) are as important as content, task, or subject matter expertise. Women arguably have a more natural affinity (both interest and skill) for process leadership than do men. It is, of course, totally within the capacity of men to do this. I certainly did in my career as a facilitator and group process designer.

 

Busting the Double Bind Paradigm

A Zen master says to his pupils: “If you say this stick is real, I will beat you. If you say this stick is not real, I will beat you. If you say nothing, I will beat you.” One pupil, however, found a solution by changing the level of communication. He walked up to the teacher, grabbed the stick, and broke it.

A redefinition of leadership includes (as in the practice of process facilitation) a redefinition of the double bind itself. A double bind is built inside a box of “either/or” thinking. Collaboration is built on “both/and” thinking. There is an entire discipline of problem-solving and thinking skills for generating collaboration and consensus. As a fun warm-up, organizational development consultants sometimes facilitate comedy improv exercises to practice a variant, “yes/and” thinking. Can we get Mitch McConnell and his buddies into a month-long retreat?

 

Interdependent Polarities

A double bind can often be seen as an interdependent polarity.3 There is a sweet spot between likable and strong, in a “dance” of situation and context. Whereas men tend (on average) to be more binary thinkers, women (on average) are good at “both/and” thinking if left to their own devices. Organizational consultant Tim Arnold (The Power of Healthy Tension: Overcoming Chronic Issues and Conflicting Values, 2017) encourages leaders to embrace a healthy “tension.” Perhaps double binds are not a problem to solve but instead a tension or paradox to manage.

 

Signs of Progress – Membership Has its Privileges

The 116th U.S. Congress (2019-2021) has 127 women (23.7 percent) — the highest percentage ever. But less than 1 in 4 women lawmakers does not make new a political “culture.”

The New York Times recently addressed the seven biases that women face: “In Her Words: 7 Issues, 7 Days.” “Women in Politics” (day 6) noted that in 2019, Nevada became the first state legislature to have more women — 23 out of 42 seats in the Assembly. Women make up 40 percent or more of the legislatures in Colorado, Oregon, Washington, and Vermont, with Maryland almost at that percentage. A balance of more women in political leadership should help reduce the prevalence and toxicity of double binds that women face.

 

Beyond the “Pantsuit”

A year after Braun was elected to the U.S. Senate, she and Senator Barbara Mikulski broke the unwritten rule that women were not allowed to wear pants on the Senate floor. In what she calls the “pantsuit episode,” Braun explained: “I was wearing my nice outfit, I thought, and I walked onto the Senate floor and gasps were audible.” That was in 1993 – only 23 hears before Hillary Clinton would become the first female presidential nominee for a major political party, pantsuits and all. Leadership had a new look. But biases and double binds? Not so much. We still have work to do.

1. Gender/sex-based spheres of influence and the development of human culture is a very important area of focus and will be explored more in this space at a later time.

2. Founded in 1962, Catalyst is a leading research and advisory organization that works with business and professions to build inclusive environments and expand opportunities for women at work using practical tools and proven solutions to advance women into leadership.

3. There is much more to be said about interdependent polarities in relationships (and not just heterosexual relationships). As explored by Esther Perel and others, here are some key polarities: predictability vs. novelty, security vs. adventure, autonomy vs. surrender, comfort vs. excitement, and freedom vs. commitment.

Please Note: Your comment may take up to 12 seconds to register and the confirmation message will appear above the “Submit a Comment” text. 

Origins of Mating Straight Talk – Reasons and Reflections

Origins of Mating Straight Talk – Reasons and Reflections

by | Jul 14, 2020 | Steven's Story

The Sleeping Lord of Manhood

“Look at me. I am a male human being. I came from Woman…the origin of my life, the source of all nourishment, support, safety, and love. I am a male human being. I cannot emulate the Woman-Source to find who I am. I have no choice but to turn my back to Her. My maleness wears separation like a scarlet letter. I am different …but what am I?

This search hurts a lot. Do you know? Will you try to understand? God does not demonstrate in my body. Newborn life does not come out of me! I am asked to manipulate the natural world and join other men to fight over finite pieces of Earth. Woman is Earth! But what am I?

It is said there is an infinite supply of love. But there is not an infinite supply of Earth. I want my share of Earth. I want my share of Woman returned to my body! Is it enough for you if I just Be? All this striving, striving, to build your nest….it makes me so weary. I try to construct your pedestal. My body becomes rigid and dead under the weight of it.

And now, you have your groups and your rituals. Feminine manifestation is easy to see and understand…. and you recognize one another. But where is the Sleeping Lord of Manhood? Only a few of my brothers even ask this question. I find most men drunk on acquisition. They report that partitioning the Earth and creating false needs is very sexy. I don’t belong to their club any more than I belong to yours.

Listen to me. The patriarch is a shell of a human being. I am a male human being unlike most of my brothers and I want your acknowledgment and support. If I discover a new kind of male power, will you honor it, will you desire it, will you desire me?! Or will you only notice the amount of security available for your archetypal child?

Admittedly, I speak from a particular and personal psychological context. For the time being, spare me your spiritual teachings, spare me your list of exceptions. I expose my projections. I expose my sour grapes. I expose my battle with the “laws of prosperity.” Just hear me out and be honest. It is time for women to tell the truth. It is time for women to look at men in a new way…..for the Earth calls out to you, to its own kind, to welcome the awakening of the Sleeping Lord.” 

~ Steven Fearing (May 1985)

 

The Jung and the Restless

The Sleeping Lord of Manhood was written 35 years ago. I was a young man, an aspirant for an unfolding new world — carrying the dreams (albeit pipe dreams in the near term) of cultural transformation birthed in the late ’60s and ’70s. I was attempting to integrate the teachings and “spiritual” impulses of the human potential movement, the explosion of body-mind therapies, and the profound resonance of my humanistic psychology graduate program. (A program developed by a colleague of Abraham Maslow.) I could still hear the echoes of Joni Mitchel from the human potential “Mecca” — the front porch of the Esalen Institute and the land of Big Sur, California. Joni pleaded, “we’ve got to get ourselves back to the garden.” And we are still trying to do that.

The Sleeping Lord was a personal journal musing, perhaps indulgent and naively “self-important.” Yet, it revisited an ancient question of metaphysical and biological essentialism: what is the primary essence of a male human being? The Sleeping Lord was written in the time of Ronald Reagan’s America; the hopes of structural change engendered by the human potential movement seemed to be dimming. I searched for meaning as the fledgling men’s movement awaited Robert Bly’s Iron John: A Book About Men (1990) and the men’s mythopoetic movement. This version of the New Age men’s movement largely sought meaning through ideas from Jungian psychology and Jungian archetypes – the King, the Warrior, the Magician, the Lover. Many men were lost, and for good reason. The “old masculine” — the stoic, self-controlled, body-armored, emotionally reticent patriarch, seemed done, finished, and not desirable. What the hell was next for men? I was mostly on the side-lines, but succumbed to the search for male initiation, the “Father,” and the “deep masculine” or inner self. Initiation into manhood was a central deficit and wound for boys in modern America. (Arguably, the plight of boys and men in 2020 has gotten worse.) My Father, Frederick Nelson Fearing, was a lovely man of little means and a lot of unexpressed emotional depth. He had much pain and guilt from a failed (and quite undiscussable) earlier marriage, and a failed marriage with my mother. I was not properly initiated into Manhood, or so it felt in 1985.

A Hero’s Journey

The “Hero’s Journey” – a search for noble masculinity in the ‘80s, was an attempt to ease the soul, or find the soul, of men who were (to use a phrase poetically delivered by Jean Houston), “between dreams” of the old and “new male”. Feminism and feminist voices were in full throttle and criticized the men’s movement with a direct assault – born of a misunderstanding of the movement’s inherent focus on psychological work, and it’s supposed lack of attention to issues of political power. In reality, these particular men were nearly 100 percent behind all empowerment positions of the women’s movement, and still are. (The feminist/academic assault on contemporary expressions of men’s rights is a part, albeit a small part, of what Mating Straight Talk will explore going forward.)

Disappointment and Feeling Betrayed

Ultimately, what was revealed (it seemed to me), unspoken but acted upon, was that the “old male” was still very much desired by women for the security they delivered. And the original men’s movement faded over time from the weight of men’s disinterest and the structural intrasexual competitiveness between men. For heterosexual men at least, women remained the priority. The fledgling “soft male” was not as unmoored as depicted in the media, but he brought mostly disadvantages to the mating game. My keen interest in evolutionary psychology and mate selection science was born out of these conditions.

Time to Get It Out

Mating Straight Talk is an important narrative in my life story. (Not the only one by any means.) I have cataloged and collated thousands of pages of articles and research, written many words, and read dozens of books on a broad range of topics related to evolutionary psychology, relationships, and sexuality. Before I wrote The Sleeping Lord of Manhood, I designed and facilitated a workshop, “Intimacy as a Path to Wholeness,” based on the work of Susan Campbell’s The Couples Journey. In 1991, I sponsored a workshop, “Sex and Power in the Workplace” (prescient of things to come) at the University of Texas Graduate School of Business. Recently, I designed and delivered experiential workshops for male-female disclosure. This website, at launch, is but a fraction of what I want to say. As the “About” page might suggest, I have a long list of blog topics in the queue. But this is also a conversation with the reader. I hope to engage and learn from others. And the relationship-sex-love-gender conversation keeps evolving with more speed than ever.

Why I Created this Website and Blog (also see About):
  • There is a conversation happening about sexuality, relationships, and the politics of gender, and I want to join it; I want to lead some of it.
  • I have a fairly unique “voice” to share with the world. I am a political progressive, post-new-age-sensitive-guy, heterosexual, humanistic “psychologist” who wishes to promote (among many other things) understanding and respect for male sexuality and male stewardship of the planet beyond memes of toxicity, and do so outside of strident positions and speech of the so-called “manosphere.”
  • I blog to legitimize the science of sexuality, relationships, and especially mate selection in humans. I blog and have a website to defend evolutionary psychology.
  • I have a website and blog in order to explore the evidence of evolved behavioral differences between men and women.
  • I blog and have a website in order to be a “truth-teller” – to bring a dose of honesty about our mating behavior and decision-making; to combat mistruths and political correctness, and expose the collusion of deceit held by men and women about mate selection and the mating economy, and share observations about the “gravitational forces” of money and physical attractiveness from an evolutionary and modern perspective.
  • I blog to share my observations about unexamined misandry and the failure to apply issues of socio-economic class and intersectionality perspectives to white men. I will promote a balanced, rational approach to “being woke” while my athleticism allows me to dodge incoming rotten tomatoes.
  • I blog to promote “power equity” between the genders, acknowledge that equity is not “sameness,” and encourage my audience to become friendly (like “blending” in aikido) with the underpinnings of biological hardwiring.
  • The counselor/therapist in me wants to explore the intersection or integration of evolutionary psychology with couple’s psychotherapy and sex therapy/sex education.
  • Blogging and this website help me discover and understand myself and consolidate a large part of my life’s work.
Who Cares?

In all of this, I am curious to discover who will be interested. Those in long-term companionate partnerships may think this website has little to offer them. Yet there may be some useful, practical insights for those not officially in the mating economy. Those privileged in the mating game (as with most elements of privilege) are not excited to listen or talk about mate selection. I hope to engage with them anyway. And defending the truth of evolved behavior sex differences is generally out of touch with the current feminist zeitgeist and not attractive to most women. That tends to create silence and avoidance by me and other men. For a heterosexual man, the need to connect with women is an intractable imperative. (As a “courtship display,” this website/blog is mostly stupid.) I want to hear from women – what is your experience? And, I definitely want to hear from relationship/psychotherapy professionals and folks in the field of evolutionary psychology.

The Heart of the Matter

MatingStraightTalk.com has finally launched. And now I am suffering from diastolic heart dysfunction. Seems I literally have a broken heart. The contents of this website are somewhat related to my story of a broken heart in the conventional sense of romantic disappointments, loss, and pain in the mating game, although I have had a few stable, relatively long-term relationships. My experience of relationship disappointment (finding a true partner) is admittedly a catalyst, but my attempt here is to deliver the science, “the why” of human mating behavior. I want to deliver insights that may assist others who feel confused, alone, or ashamed. I could outline the actual science about romantic heartbreak and how the absence of partnership affects health issues and longevity, but I will leave that for another time; suffice to say, they are connected, especially for men.

More than a Little Help from My Friend

At times, I have been overwhelmed by the depth and complexity of the content and by the technical issues that plagued the execution of this site. It has not been good for my heart, and yet I could not let it go. With the help of my dear friend Tom Carroll, I persevered. My debt to Tom is incalculable. Tom kept me going with his technical skills, creative brilliance, natural curiosity, childlike excitement, and support.

Going Forward

One of the true loves of my life, Jodi, met me in 2010 when I was successfully dealing with heart-related A-fib. She said, “I can’t date you if you’re dead.” So true. I hope to survive diastolic heart dysfunction* long enough to get most of my story and thoughts into this blog — into “Steven’s Stories” and the other nine blog categories.

Years ago, I created a “Sleeping Lord of Manhood” album-cover with song titles that marked significant life events and challenging conditions that shaped me. Each song is a story perhaps worth telling (another time). There is also an “album” of stories more aligned with the pursuit and science of happiness, excerpted from my writings on the “Seven Domains of Well-being.” Taking a cue from the ancient Greeks, I will uncover the “True,” the “Beautiful,” “the Good,” and “the Pleasurable.” There may be a few stories about my family: “Kansas City Home,” “Brothers Four,” “Beary-Bowl Bred,” and “Jayhawk Nation.” (These song titles only make sense to family and close friends.) Ultimately, the focus of “Steven’s Stories” will be less about the past and more about the present. But here’s a loving peek at (my) youthful “Brothers Four” – from left: Max, Me, David, and Greg. The Sleeping Lord of Manhood shows up and calls forth.

Picture of Steven and brothers

Thanks for reading this long post!

Steven

*I am quite optimistic about healing my heart physically through renewed (post-COVID) fitness and a functional medicine protocol to fortify heart mitochondria.

A quick addendum:  My diastolic heart “dysfunction” was apparently healed by my aerobic regimen and other health protocols, or perhaps never really existed.  My follow-up echo in September showed no problem.  

 

Please Note: Your comment may take up to 12 seconds to register and the confirmation message will appear above the “Submit a Comment” text. 

Sex Can Be Funny – 50 Humorous Quotes, Volume 1

Sex Can Be Funny – 50 Humorous Quotes, Volume 1

by | Jun 30, 2020 | Humor

Yes, sex can be funny.  Stereotypes about men and women can be amusing.  Even relationship conflict can be (painfully) hilarious.  Anything with a kernel of truth that resonates with your personal experience can be funny and bring a feeling of recognition and being understood.

Sex and romance have inspired humorous musings by writers, philosophers, artists and comedians throughout time.  The joy and agony of “love” have often been exalted or exorcised with comical observation.   Here are a few quips that might make you laugh or make you think.  We need this particular humor to survive our human condition – to recognize the differences between men and women and the universality of our quest for sexual fulfillment.  Mostly, we need to laugh at ourselves in order to survive the whole thing.

Note: Future blogs in this category will explore serious relationship topics in a humorous light and the importance of humor itself in the science of attraction and sex.  For now, let’s get the laugh reflex (or smile muscles) going with some funny observations and quotes.

50 Funny Quotes About Sex, Love, and Relationship (Volume 1):

  1. “There are a number of mechanical devices which increase sexual arousal, particularly in women. Chief among these is the Mercedes-Benz SL500.”  — Lynn Lavner
  2. “It isn’t premarital sex if you have no intention of getting married.” — George Burns
  3. “Women might be able to fake orgasms. But men can fake a whole relationship.”  — Sharon Stone
  4. “Clinton lied. A man might forget where he parks or where he lives, but he never forgets oral sex, no matter how bad it is.”  — Barbara Bush
  5. “Ah yes, divorce, from the Latin word meaning to rip out a man’s genitals through his wallet.” – Robin Williams
  6. “According to a new survey, women say they feel more comfortable undressing in front of men than they do undressing in front of other women. They say women are too judgmental where, of course, men are just grateful.” – Robert De Niro
  7. “There’s a new medical crisis. Doctors are reporting that many men are having allergic reactions to latex condoms.  They say they cause severe swelling.  So what’s the problem?”  – Dustin Hoffman
  8. “It’s been so long since I’ve had sex, I’ve forgotten who ties up whom.” – Joan Rivers
  9. “You don’t appreciate a lot of stuff in school until you get older. Little things like being spanked every day by a middle-aged woman. Stuff you pay good money for later in life.” — Emo Phillips
  10. “Bigamy is having one wife too many. Monogamy is the same.”  — Oscar Wilde
  11. “I was nauseous and tingly all over. I was either in love or I had smallpox.”  – Woody Allen
  12. “My heart’s in the right place. I know cuz I hid it there.”  — Carrie Fisher
  13. “You’d be surprised how much it costs to look this cheap.” – Dolly Parton
  14. “Good girls go to heaven and bad girls go everywhere.” – Helen Gurley Brown
  15. “A man who correctly guesses a woman’s age may be smart, but he is not very bright.” – Lucille Ball
  16. “Anyone who says he can see through women is missing a lot.” — Groucho Marx
  17. “It’s no good pretending than any relationship has a future if your record collections disagree violently or if your favorite films wouldn’t even speak to one another if they met at a party.” — Nick Hornby
  18. “Sex is one of the most wholesome, beautiful, and natural experiences that money can buy.” — Steve Martin
  19. “Sex without love is a meaningless experience, but as far as meaningless experiences go, it’s pretty damn good.” — Woody Allen
  20. “Sex is like air; it’s not important unless you aren’t getting any.” —  John Callahan
  21. “It’s not true that I had nothing on. I had the radio on.” – Marilyn Monroe
  22. “My wife and I were happy for 20 years – then we met.” — Rodney Dangerfield
  23. “I remember the first time I had sex. I kept the receipt.” – Groucho Marx
  24. “Women don’t want to hear what you think. Women want to hear what they think – in a deeper voice.” (source deleted)
  25. “We have reason to believe that man first walked upright to free his hands for masturbation.” – Lily Tomlin
  26. “What I really need is a woman who loves me for my money but doesn’t understand math.” – Mike Birbiglia
  27. “My best birth control now is just to leave the lights on.” — Joan Rivers
  28. “God gave me both a penis and a brain, but unfortunately not enough blood supply to run both at the same time.” — Robin Williams
  29. “Seems to me the basic conflict between men and women, sexually, is that men are like firemen. To men, sex is an emergency, and no matter what we’re doing we can be ready in two minutes.” – Jerry Seinfeld
  30. “I think we can all agree that sleeping around is a great way to meet people.” – Chelsea Handler
  31. “If we take matrimony at its lowest, we regard it as a sort of friendship recognized by the police.” – Robert Louis Stevenson
  32. “Marriage is a wonderful institution, but who wants to live in an institution?” — Groucho Marx
  33. “Some people ask the secret of our long marriage. We take time to go to a restaurant two times a week.  A little candlelight dinner, soft music and dancing.  She goes on Tuesdays, I go Fridays.” — Henny Youngman
  34. “Sex and pizza, they say, are similar. When it’s good, it’s good.  When it’s bad, you get it on your shirt.”  – Mike Birbiglia
  35. “Bisexuality immediately doubles your chances for a date on a Saturday night.” – Woody Allen
  36. “Never marry a man you wouldn’t want to be divorced from.” – Nora Ephron
  37. “There are only three things women need in life: food, water, and compliments.” – Chris Rock
  38. “A man can sleep around, no questions asked, but if a woman makes nineteen or twenty mistakes, she’s a tramp.” — Joan Rivers
  39. “Whoever named it necking was a poor judge of anatomy.” — Groucho Marx
  40. “Women have all the power because women have all the vaginas.” — Dave Attel

     

    From Why Men Don’t Listen and Women Don’t Read Maps by Allan and Barbara Pease

  41. “Once I didn’t talk to my wife for six months,” said the comedian. “I didn’t want to interrupt.
  42. “Men hate criticism – that’s why they like to marry virgins.”
  43. “Men give their penis a name because they don’t want a stranger making 99 percent of their decisions for them.”
  44. “You’re a lousy lover!” she said. “How can you tell in two minutes?” he asked.
  45. “Men prefer looks to brains because most men can see better than they can think.”
  46. “Men fantasize about having sex with two women. Women fantasize about it too – so they’ll have someone to talk to when he falls asleep.”
  47. “Men don’t fake orgasm – no man wants to make a face like that on purpose.”
  48. “Most women prefer sex with the lights out – they can’t bear to see a man enjoying himself.”
  49. “Ray plays his wedding video backward. He says it’s so he can see himself walk out of church a free man.”
  50. “Marriage has its good side. It teaches you loyalty, forbearance, tolerance, self-restraint, and other valuable qualities you wouldn’t need if you stayed single.”

Dear reader, keeping laughing at yourself.  That is actually sexy and good for your health.  Please send me your funny quips and quotes about sex and relationships.  I will give you credit, and we can increase the laughter for everyone in Volume 2. 

Thanks!

Please Note: Your comment may take up to 12 seconds to register and the confirmation message will appear above the “Submit a Comment” text. 

Spontaneous and Response Desire – the Underbelly of Heterosexual Mating

Spontaneous and Response Desire – the Underbelly of Heterosexual Mating

by | Jun 16, 2020 | Biological Difference, Dating & Mating Economy, Relationship Issues, Sexuality

 

John met Sarah at a happy-hour event. She was surrounded by a group of men, but John got some eye contact from her and shared a quick introduction and small talk.  It was apparent she was not “with” any of these men, although each one was interested in her.  John was enamored by Sarah’s bright eyes, her smile, her gestures, her voice – by everything about her. He felt compelled (an urgency in his body) to get a moment with her as she walked toward the door to depart.  He gave her his card.  (He knew that was lame.) Of course, she did not call him.  He saw her weeks later at the same event.  He asked for her number and declared his interest.  She said she “was not dating right now.” John expressed understanding and acceptance. But he did not really understand if Sarah was just not into him or if this was actually a “bad time” (whatever that meant) for her.  John had done his part to initiate but did not know Sarah’s “situation” or what she was actually thinking and feeling.  And he never would.

What Are ‘Spontaneous’ and ‘Response’ Desire?

“Spontaneous” and “response” desire are research terms related to the sexual psychology of men and women.  They reflect behavioral expressions of biological sex differences (hormones and brain), evolutionary mating strategies, sex “drive” differences, differences in sexual “context” setting, and functioning of the modern-day dating and mating economy.

When the spontaneous desire of men encounters the response desire of women, misunderstanding and frustration may ensue.  This blog explores research on sexual desire by Emily Nagoski* (Come As You Are, 2015) and is a companion to the blog post “Is Your Sexual Foot on The Accelerator or Brake?”   I will address issues of spontaneous vs. response desire related to long-term committed partners and supply and demand in the mating economy for initial mate selection and briefly return to John and Sarah before concluding.  But first, let’s revisit some of the science.

Sexual Excitation System (SES) and Sexual Inhibition System (SIS)

Emily Nagoski suggests both men and women have an excitation system (accelerator) and inhibition system (brake) for sexual activity.   She calls this the “dual control model.”  Think of this dual control as biological mechanisms for approach and avoidance.

Men Operate From Their Accelerator

Men operate primarily from their accelerator, or sexual excitation system (SES), constantly scanning the environment for anything sexually relevant.  The SES turns-on with anything a man sees (especially), hears, smells, tastes, or imagines.  The SES operates proactively — it approaches, pursues, and initiates spontaneously.

Women Are “Brake” Dominant

 The inhibition system or brake (SIS), in contrast to the SES, notices all potential threats in the environment and sends a signal to turn-off.  It is associated with fear of consequences and self-consciousness.  Women are decidedly SIS-dominant.  They respond to sexual opportunities only in the right context and when safety is assured.  They are quite content to rest in a cautious or neutral zone until the right stimulus is presented.  Out of sight, out of mind is the default position of response desire.

Spontaneous Desire is the Signature Feature of the Male Sex Drive

“Spontaneous desire” happens when the SES is fully activated.  The SES fuels spontaneous sexual pursuit with a sense of urgency and eagerness.   Male sexuality is “accelerator-dominant” and spontaneous by nature; it reacts, more than women, to sexually relevant stimuli independent of context and more commonly initiates.  Spontaneous desire is the signature feature of the male sex drive, fueled by testosterone and brain structures.  (See future blogs for further discussion of sex drive, sexual thoughts, and fantasies.)

When Arousal Meets a Great Context

“Response desire” occurs when one is willing to receive sexual interest although not initially feeling desire or sexual arousal.  The SES accelerator system is quiet; the SIS braking system is alert but not overly triggered. With sufficient sexual stimuli and appropriate context, response desire allows one (usually a woman) to move from a place of neutrality to being aroused and desirous of a sexual connection.   Because women are more “brake-dominant” in their sexual response, their desire more likely happens, in Nagoski’s words, “when [physiological] arousal meets a great context.”  For many women, subjective desire comes after physiological arousal, not before.  Rosemary Basson (author and Director of the University of British Columbia Sexual Medicine Program) says for many women, desire is not the cause of love-making, but rather the result.

Eighty-Five Percent of Women Are Response-Desire Dominant

According to Nagoski, 30 percent of women never experience spontaneous desire for sex, while 75 percent of men mostly experience spontaneous desire.   She says 55 percent of women experience a relative combination of spontaneous and response desire but ultimately concludes (Come As You Are, p. 307) that 85 percent of women are response-desire dominant.

Context Is Everything for Women

Nagoski says context for women is made of two things:  

1) the circumstances of the present moment – whom you are with, where you are, whether the situation is novel or familiar, risky or safe, and

2) a woman’s brain state in the present moment:  whether she is relaxed or stressed, trusting or not, loving or not, at that moment. 

“The evidence is mounting that women’s sexual response is more sensitive than men’s to context, including mood and relationship factors, and women vary more from each other in how much such factors influence their sexual response.”  (Come As You Are, p.  75).  For women, a great context can create subjective arousal; a bad context can prevent it entirely.

Desire Patterns in Long-term Relationships

The “collision” or “collaboration” of these two desire patterns can create interesting challenges in heterosexual sexual relating, especially in sustaining desire in long-term monogamous relationships.

For maintaining mutual desire in a long-term monogamous relationship, Esther Perel, (author of Mating in Captivity and leading expert in couple’s psychotherapy) recommends developing autonomy “inside of” the relationship in order to create a space for “wanting” what you don’t have.   John Gottman, in contrast, recommends (The Science of Trust) deepening intimacy as a doorway to the erotic life in a long-term monogamous relationship.   Perel says “build a bridge to cross” fueled by “wanting” and Gottman says “build a bridge together” fueled by “having.”

Increase Activation of Accelerator and Decrease Activation of the Brake

Nagoski says either of these strategies may accomplish the same overall goal:  increasing activation of the accelerator and decreasing activation of the brake.  The goal of both approaches is to sustain curiosity.  Perel suggests we sustain curiosity about our partner when we view them from a distance.  Gottman suggests we sustain curiosity about the nature of pleasure in the context of commitment.

Take Control of the Context

It is clear that passion does not happen automatically in a long-term relationship. But passion can happen if the couple takes deliberate control of their context.  Neither the strategy of distance nor the strategy of deepening intimacy by itself will nullify the foundational, biological difference between spontaneous male desire and response-oriented female desire.

Spontaneous and Response Desire in the Brain

Differences in brain structure between men and women relate to the spontaneous and response desire systems.  Men, in general, have a higher baseline of activity in the older part of the brain, the limbic system, which makes them particularly alert during the first stage of seduction, according to the renowned physician and author, Marianne Legato (Why Men Die First).

Area of Sexual Pursuit is 2.5 Times Larger In Males

The medial preoptic area (MPOA), found in the hypothalamus, is related to sexual pursuit and is 2.5 times larger in males, according to neuropsychiatrist, Louann Brizendine (The Male Brain).  Men also show greater activity in the visual cortex when perceiving erotic pictures, reflecting a gender-specific visual mechanism for sexual selection.

Female Amygdala and Cautious Sexual Response

The brain’s danger and alert system is the amygdala.  While larger in males, the female amygdala seems to be more sensitive to the fear of consequences, modulating a more cautious sexual response.

Fear of Punishment and Sexual Anxiety in the Female Brain

Another part of the brain, the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), creates a more response-dominant neurological foundation for women.  According to Brizendine, the ACC is the worrywart, fear-of-punishment area, and center of sexual performance anxiety.  It weighs options, detects conflicts, and motivates decisions.  The ACC is also the area for self-consciousness; the ACC is bigger in women.

Spontaneous and Response Desire is Predicted in Human Mating

The difference in male and female desire patterns is extremely relevant to the operation of the dating and mating economy.  Spontaneous desire and response desire are aligned with the short-term mating strategy of men, the long-term mating strategy of women (respectively), and the biological foundation of the sexual accelerator and brake.   Spontaneous desire for men and response desire for women are predicted by human mating strategies as defined in the fields of evolutionary psychology and biological science.

A man’s short-term mating strategy fuels desire for contact with women for any possible chance of a romantic or sexual encounter.   A women’s long-term strategy creates caution and selectivity in accepting male advances.  The reasons for this evolutionary adaptation are central tenets of mate selection science.   (See Human Mating Strategies and What is Mate Selection Science? pages.)

Supply and Demand of Spontaneous and Response Desire

Men (mostly) sell.  Women (mostly) buy.  In the human mating economy, the buyer (female chooser) significantly controls the marketplace; men spontaneously pursue, women respond when ready.  The difference between buyer and seller in the sexual marketplace determines motivation, behavior, and the experience of sexual scarcity or abundance.

Sex is (Relatively) an Abundant Resource for Women

Sex for most women (during their fertile years) is an abundant resource; it is not in short supply.  It is a need (subject to self-imposed selection preferences) that can almost always be met.  Therefore, there is no need to attend to it (out of sight, out of mind).  There is no need to respond to any particular man if conditions are not perfect and that man is not preferred (in that moment) over other men available in her dating pool.   At another moment in time, Sarah might respond to John. 

Conclusion

Sexual relating between men and women often hinges on the “dance” between spontaneous desire and response desire – the “undercurrents” of strategy and preference in dating and mating.   Desire patterns are biologically based with evolutionary roots (human mating adaptations for reproduction and survival of children).  Understanding sex differences in spontaneous and response desire is a pathway for awareness, empathy, and behavior change that will improve heterosexual relationships.

Notes

Emily Nagoski is the former Director of Wellness Education at Smith College where she taught Women’s Sexuality.  She is a respected author and expert in the field of sexuality — writing, speaking, and training internationally.

If you are tracking along with these blogs (in addition to reading pages on the main menus!), you will notice I have cited (so far) male-female differences related to:

  • subjective vs. physiological arousal,
  • sexual excitation vs. inhibition,
  • spontaneous vs. response desire,
  • sex “drive,” 
  • influence of situational context, and
  • overall mating strategies.

Please Note: Your comment may take up to 12 seconds to register and the confirmation message will appear above the “Submit a Comment” text. 

Is Your Sexual Foot on the Accelerator or Brake?

Is Your Sexual Foot on the Accelerator or Brake?

by | Jun 2, 2020 | Biological Difference, Relationship Issues, Sexuality, Women's Issues

Men and women are different. Their “sexual engine” makes different use of the accelerator and brake. Author, sex researcher, and professor of women’s sexuality, Emily Nagoski, calls this the “dual control model” (Come As You Are, 2015). This model explains aspects of the biological and psychological difference between male and female sexuality and what we need to know to have sexual self-confidence and empathy for our partners.

Accelerator vs. Brake

The central sexual response mechanism in the brains of men and women consist of two universal components – a sexual accelerator and a sexual brake.

This dual control model consists of two parts:

  1. The Sexual Excitation System (SES) or “accelerator” of sexual response receives information about sexually relevant stimuli in the environment. It sends signals from the brain to the genitals to “turn-on”. The SES constantly scans the “context” (including thoughts and feelings) for things that are sexually relevant. With the SES, anything you see, hear, smell, taste, or imagine might send a “turn-on” message.
  2. The Sexual Inhibition System (SIS) is the sexual “brake.” This system notices all potential threats in the environment (such as STI transmission, unwanted pregnancy, social consequences of sexual activity) and sends signals to “turn off”. Nagoski calls this the sexual “foot brake.” It is primarily associated with the fear of consequences. There is also a second brake, more akin to a handbrake, associated with a fear of performance failure, like worry about not having an orgasm. “If you try to drive with the handbrake on,” says Nagoski, you might be able to get where you want to go, but it’ll take longer and use a lot more gas” (Come As You Are, p. 49).
For Arousal — Activate the Accelerator and Deactivate the Brake

Arousal (psychological desire) happens with activation of the accelerator and deactivation of the brake. The former is more salient for men, the latter more important for women. Male sexuality is accelerator-dominant because the SES scans for female attributes that are cues of fertility. The SES (in men) is the pursuer and the initiator. Women’s brake system comports with the evolutionary agenda for a cautious choice of a mate and a need for safety.

Accelerator and Brake in the Brain

Differences in brain structure between men and women are related to the male-dominant accelerator system and the female-dominant brake system.

Men, in general, have a higher baseline of activity in the older part of the brain, the limbic system, which makes them particularly alert during the first stage of seduction, according to Marianne Legato* (Why Men Die First). The medial preoptic area (MPOA), found in the hypothalamus, is related to sexual pursuit and is 2.5 times larger in males, according to neuropsychiatrist Louann Brizendine (The Male Brain). Men also show greater activity in the visual cortex when perceiving erotic pictures, reflecting a gender-specific visual mechanism for sexual selection.

Female Amygdala is More Sensitive to the Fear of Consequences

The brain’s danger and alert system is the amygdala. While larger in males, the female amygdala seems to be more sensitive to the fear of consequences descriptive of the braking system.

Brain’s Worry Center is Bigger in Women

Another part of the brain, the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), is also involved in “braking.” According to Brizendine, the ACC is the worrywart, fear-of-punishment area, and center of sexual performance anxiety. It weighs options, detects conflicts, and motivates decisions. The ACC is also the area for self-consciousness (the “handbrake”). The ACC is bigger in women. In addition to a less active ACC in men, testosterone decreases worry about punishment and reduces the strength of a sexual brake and fortifies the sexual accelerator.

Women Put On the Brakes

For women, in both ancient and modern times, safety is a powerful need that activates the sexual brake: fear of being killed, being raped, getting pregnant, and/or having their reputation destroyed. A woman’s deepest unconscious fear is that a man will rape or kill her. (A man’s deepest unconscious fear is that a woman will sexually humiliate him.)

Sexual Temperament Questionnaire

According to Nagoski’s research using her “Sexual Temperament Questionnaire,” 50-65% of women have a moderately strong inhibition system (SIS). Any increase in stress (anxiety, overwhelm, exhaustion) will reduce interest. And, 25% of women have a “high” SIS or a very strong braking system. These women are sensitive to all reasons not to be aroused and have more sexual problems than women with less active SIS. Nagoski says low female desire is not about hormones or boredom with monogamy; it is most likely about stress, depression, anxiety, trauma, attachment, relationship satisfaction, and lack of self-compassion. [Other researchers say boredom and lack of novelty do affect female marital desire.]

SES and SIS Operate Independently

The sensitivity of the SES and SIS are individual traits. Both can be sensitive, both can be not sensitive, and one or the other can be sensitive and not sensitive, co-existing together. (It can get very complicated!) But the general differences of dual control between men and women directly affect their sexual relating and sexual psychology. These differences are congruent with evolutionary theory and mate selection science.

Asexuals Have Essentially No Sexual Excitation System

A fairly weak accelerator (independent of brakes) is one predictor of asexuality – people who do not desire sexual contact. In studies of self-identified asexuals, researchers found asexuals had significantly “less accelerator” activity than their sexual counterparts (Prause and Graham, 2007**). Nagoski posits that part of the cause of asexuality as a sexual orientation for women is that their brains do not notice sexually relevant stimuli. Nagoski says asexuals represent only about 1 percent of the general population. Whereas, about 5-10 percent of women score as having low SES on the Sexual Temperament Questionnaire.

Why is it Important to Understand the Sexual Accelerator and Brake?

Men and women have differences that we must acknowledge and understand to have fulfilling romantic and sexual relationships.

A difference in the level of desire is the single most common sexual dysfunction for couples. Usually, that dysfunction includes a belief by one partner that their level of desire is better or is the way it “should be.” Nagoski suggests it is not the differential in desire that causes the dysfunction but how the couple manages it. The problem isn’t desire itself; it’s the context. What is needed is more sexually relevant stimuli activating the accelerator and fewer things hitting the brake.

Advice for Couples

Good advice to couples is to focus first and foremost on the operation of her “brakes.”  What is the right context for romance and sex; what context for sexual expression takes her foot off the brake? What are the sources of her stress, anxiety, and relationship dissatisfaction? What trauma is still unexamined and unresolved? What triggers her handbrake — body image concerns or worry about orgasm? The to-do list in her head?

Nagoski has a helpful worksheet in Come As You Are to identify and list the “not-so-sexy” inhibitory contexts (as well as a worksheet for situational accelerators) in the following categories: mental and physical well-being, partner characteristics, relationship characteristics, other life circumstances, and the sexual activities practiced.

Conclusion

The composition of our excitation and inhibition systems is set by our biology, life experiences, and habits. Creating the right balance of acceleration and braking for any person or couple is more art than science, and probably hard work. Again, these are individualized sensitivities. But there is no substitute for giving your partner understanding, acceptance, and compassion. Start with how men and women are generally different and what part of that difference is true for you as a person and a couple. Let’s refuel that engine with the right contexts and get it back on the road at the right speed.

Notes

See blog: Spontaneous and Response Desire — the Underbelly of Heterosexual Mating and future blogs on the importance of context for women.

*Marianne Legato is an internationally renowned academic, physician, author, lecturer, and pioneer in the field of gender-specific medicine. She is Professor Emerita of Clinical Medicine at Columba University and founder of The Partnership of Gender-Specific Medicine.

**Prause, N. and Graham, C., “Asexuality: classification and characterization.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 36, 2007, p. 341-56).

Please Note: Your comment may take up to 12 seconds to register and the confirmation message will appear above the “Submit a Comment” text. 

Sexual Non-concordance: Recipe for Relationship Confusion

Sexual Non-concordance: Recipe for Relationship Confusion

by | May 19, 2020 | Dating & Mating Economy, Relationship Issues, Sexuality

As a man, have you tried to make love to a woman that “seemed” turned-on but actually was not?

As a woman, have you endured sexual contact you did not want even though the man was convinced your body signaled otherwise?

As a man, have you ever hesitated to escalate sexual activity because the woman’s body was not giving you the green light?

As a woman, have you ever been frustrated that a man was sexually tepid, cautious, or lost interest because your body did not respond to him, even though you were very ready for sex?

Men and Women Are Different – the Science of Non-Concordance

Men and women are quite different in the degree of alignment (“concordance”) between their subjective sexual desire and physiological sexual arousal. According to preeminent sex educator and author Emily Nagoski (Come as You Are, 2015) and other researchers, women have very random or little concordance (10%) between their physical sexual arousal and psychological sexual desire. A woman may be lubricated or have genital vasocongestion and not be psychologically turned-on. Conversely, a woman who is not lubricated may actually be subjectively in a state of desire.

The prevalence of female sexual non-concordance can cause immense confusion in sexual interactions, especially for male partners. Consent cannot be inferred or ruled out by the evidence of physiological arousal or lack thereof.

Two Systems

Non-concordance is about the relationship between the peripheral system, the genitals, and the central system, the brain: they are two separate but interconnected systems. The relationship between these two systems is different for women and men. For women, the two systems are not necessarily in sync; for men, they mostly are. Men are indeed more simple in this regard — more transparent and obvious in their sexual interest and intent.

Nagoski’s research is primarily focused on exploring, explaining, and normalizing female non-concordance — an overlap of subjective arousal and physiological arousal of only ten percent. But she asserts that men have 50% concordance (overlap) between their physical arousal and psychological desire. Anecdotal evidence (there is less research on men) reveals male concordance closer to 80%, rather than 50%. 

Male Sexual Non-concordance?

When a man gets an erection during sleep (nocturnal penile tumescence – NPT) or wakes up with an erection (a common phenomenon that decreases with age), it is likely the result of daily fluctuations in testosterone levels, says neuroscientist, Louann Brizendine. These erections are different from true sexual arousal because they originate from testosterone receptors that live on nerve cells in a man’s spinal cord, testicles, penis, and brain. NPT (“morning wood”) is not related to sexual thoughts, dreams, or stimulation.  It is the result of the sleep cycle, combined with healthy nerves and blood flow.

If a man has a regular day-time erection (as opposed to NPT), it is nearly guaranteed that he is psychologically turned-on by some sexually relevant stimulus. A female partner would not likely be confused about the presence of a sexual context or his level of interest and consent. Conversely, a man without an erection is not subjectively turned-on in most cases. His body and subjective experience are concordant; they are in agreement. When a man experiences erectile dysfunction (ED) caused by actual vascular problems, it may be possible that subjective desire is present. Although the overlay of stress and anxiety about ED will likely impede the experience of desire.

Female Sexual Non-concordance – Tricky Relationship Dynamics

According to Nagoski, female genital response (what she calls expecting) does not equate with being subjectively “turned on.” Again, there can be physiological arousal with vasocongestion (blood flow and swelling) of the genitals and/or lubrication of the vagina, and yet the woman does not experience psychological desire.

Nagoski says this genital response is a conditioned reflex. Blood flow to the genitals indicates the woman has been exposed to something the brain interprets as sexually relevant, with no “opinion” about whether she liked whatever or whoever was present at the time.

“Lubrication Error” #1 – False Positive

With this “error”, the woman’s body is responding positively (physiological arousal and “expecting”) but she is not turned on. She is not in a state of desiring or wanting. “My body is aroused and expecting, but I am not enjoying it.”

This can cause immense confusion for men about a woman’s interest and consent for sexual activity, especially if she has acted with sexual interest in the past or in that present moment.

Nagoski uses the movie Fifty Shades of Gray as an example of this: Anastasia did not like the spanking she got from Gray. She felt demeaned, debased, and abused. But Grey inserts his finger in her vagina and apparently feels lubrication – so as to convince her that she liked it. Nagoski asserts that was a big error in reading sexual signals in that encounter (as opposed to other scenes in the movie). Lubrication means it was sexually relevant, not that is was sexually appealing.

Obviously, this error in understanding a woman’s actual consent has immense relevance to the incidence and prosecution of sexual assault and rape.

Nagoski: “Bodies do not say yes or no, they only say, “that’s sexually relevant, without any comment on whether it was appealing, much less whether it is wanted.” A penis in a vagina is sexually relevant, though it may be unappealing, unwanted, and unwelcome. There is no wanting necessary for a genital response.”

“Lubrication Error” #2 – False Negative

Genital non-response also does not indicate a lack of enjoyment!

“My body is not responding, is seeming not aroused, but I am actually enjoying it. I want you to proceed without delay!” Subjectively the woman is in a state of desire. There is no arousal, “expecting,” or lubrication, and yet there is wanting. This error is most common for post-menopausal women.

While this error does not create a violation of consent, it does create immense frustration for both partners. The man is getting no signs of wetness. She is likely to get frustrated at his lack of assertion or insertion. Inextricably linked to her own turn-on, she wants to be wanted by him. He is second-guessing himself and loses his sense of potency and self-confidence. He does not know how to please her and he no longer knows how to please himself, even if, ironically, that is actually what she wants from him. (I have been there.)

How to Prevent Errors of Sexual Non-concordance (Miscommunication)?

Nagoski has little to recommend to women to better understand a man’s intent and readiness because that is not a common problem. For men, her recommendation (in a woman’s voice) is simple: “What my genitals are doing doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with how I feel. Thirty years of research confirms this. So please pay attention to my words, not my vagina.”

The void created by the failure to communicate is soon filled with poison, drivel, and misrepresentation. ~ C. Northcote Parkinson.

Please Note: Your comment may take up to 12 seconds to register and the confirmation message will appear above the “Submit a Comment” text.