“No”, does not always mean “No”. Sometimes, for some women, it means “Take me!” Whilst it is extremely risky and unwise for men to take “No” to mean “Take me!” if they do not know the woman, in a Taken In Hand marriage only a small fraction of the communication between man and wife is in words. Most communication is unspoken. The amount of unspoken information passing between two people who know each other well is vast. This is why it is not irresponsible immoral madness for a man in a Taken In Hand relationship with a woman like DeeMarie, to act on the woman's unspoken “Take me!” despite the woman's spoken “No!”

DeeMarie is clearly looking for a very special man – one who has the ability to pick up on her unspoken wishes without her having to spell them out for him, and one who has the courage to act on this knowledge. The beauty of finding a man like this is that – contrary to what some readers might think – such a man is far less likely to harm a woman than a man less able to pick up subtle cues and hear unspoken wishes. The latter man lacks the necessary sensitivity and psychological insight that DeeMarie and many other Taken In Hand woman need. Such men can also seem annoyingly tentative and deferential to women like DeeMarie.

You are right not to settle for a man who doesn't get this, DeeMarie. There are men out there who do get it, and who do have the necessary strength and courage and knowledge.

If you're in an established relationship with a deep, intuitive connection, you shouldn't have to worry about feminists "screaming" anything.

Note to guys: if you're not in the above described circumstance, definitely worry about screaming feminists and basically women in general unless you want to find yourself in HUGE legal hot water.

I myself like to be taken AND made love to. My man should know when I want either one or the other. Or both. Now that's a man!

I agree with this absolutely. You cannot expect a man to know everything intuitively. There may be some who do, but the majority, I would guess, do not, and need you to tell them what you would like them to do. it certainly doesn't make him any less of a man if he doesn't know what you want from him without any prompting.

I generally had to indicate my desire to be spanked to men before they would actually do anything about it. My hsuband certainly didn't know by instinct that this was what I wanted, until I made it clear to him. And I imagine that the same applies to ravishing, if that is your cup of tea. Once he knows what you want, he may thoroughly enjoy doing it, how will you know if you don't give him the chance?

Louise

But what if he's a man that you absolutely DO NOT want to be with, but he thinks he's picking up on signals from you that you just want to be taken?...as many men have sworn was the case before with women when they were on the witness stand defending against rape. So he takes you really and truly against your will. You're only word to say that you don't want it is 'stop or 'no', but you've said that really means "take me".

I don't know...I think we have to be careful with this. My husband and I play this game all the time, but we've discussed it and we have other words that mean "stop" for me to use. Unless one is in a trusting relationship with someone where they've pre-discussed the word 'no', then I most certainly do think that no means no. It's just too serious a thing for men to have to guess at, read minds or body signals, or just hope for the best. I don't think we should put them in that position.

We need our men to be strong for us and to be confident in their control of the house and in their ability to make decisions. The last thing I'd want to do is weaken them by putting them in situations where they could end up in jail unless they're a mind reader or at the very least, just really lucky.

I really believe you have to verbally consent first, and then you can say no all you want.

This is incredibly risky, and it is a little unreasonable I think to expect guys to read your mind. We in America are in a highly litigious society and just the accusation of rape can ruin men forever. Duke Lacrosse anyone? I know this is Taken in Hand and certain women derive pleasure from being overwhelmed (I understand that, I really do), but please be strong enough to communicate honestly. Try and see where he is coming from, "Taken In Hand" man or not.

--Harold

The key is that women choose men - not the other way around. If she has chosen him - rather than his imposing himself on her - miscommunication tends to be minimized.

It [acting without explicit consent] is a lot to expect and some women expect it.

For them - women who want to be taken in hand against their will - a big part of romance is encapsulated in the notion of a man "just knowing" what to do.

It is a matter of personal taste. Ruth's desire to be explicit is perfectly valid as is DeeMarie's desire not to be explicit.

Expecting a man to have 'intuitive smarts' is asking quite a lot, is it not?

Sure, it *is* asking quite a lot and it is quite unfair to expect most men to be able to do it. But some women expect a lot of their men.

Does it make him less of a man to not be a mind reader?

Well... an inability to read minds does not make a man "substandard", so let's reverse it: It makes him *more* of a man if he *can* read her mind.

And unless his mind-reading capability is perfect, he is taking a big risk by acting without explicit consent.

If woman expects that kind of ability and risk-taking from a man, she would be well advised to make it worth the risk. A man who takes that risk isn't going to do it for just any woman. He will only do it for a woman who is very special.

I happen to be married to such a woman. Take a look at my first post on this site: How can I be sure that she wants to be taken in hand? You will see me at the cusp of my struggle with her. You will see just how difficult it is for a man to deal with such a woman.

I had two distinct advantages over most men: twenty-plus years of marriage to hone my mind-reading ability and the help of the folks on this site. With that going for me, I managed to "get it".

Then one day, after we had worked it out and gotten to the point where we both understood what we meant, I gave her a long, hard spanking.

Because, in my opinion, being Taken in Hand against her will, or being "ravished" against her will - without even being willing to discuss it - is more than a woman has a right to expect without some serious consequences.

It is quite likely - most probably even a sure bet - that Taken in Hand excites a different part of the brain from that activated by tea and crumpets. Despite pretenses of sophistication, humans have not evolved nearly as much as they like to pretend in politics of the bedroom.

I completely agree that we each have needs that need to be met. Whether they are the same or different from yours or mine matter not. Yours are important and finding the right person is the integral key.

In my particular case, my chosen men were utter failures. I can't say for sure (or want to share) what went behind my choice of men.

It wasn't until I was told in no uncertain terms I wasn't in control any longer that I sat up and paid attention. For me it was that very lack of choosing which started the path to happiness. However, a lot went into making it right. His complete and rapt attention to what I wanted, thought, fantasized and felt. Nothing was left unknown. If I had wanted to be ravished, then ravished I would have gotten, although not necessarily on my terms. But loss of control for me is a huge spark in a Taken In Hand relationship.

Perhaps I was lucky, perhaps it was meant to be. But my needs were met and continue to be so. Not without bumps or need to clear the path from time to time. I do believe the precedence of listening from the beginning saved us to this day. Being supportive and understanding helped us to build the strength we still have. It allows us both to feed our needs, desires and sexuality. And for me...always my securities are important. Oddly enough it's my strength of belief in love and his strength of character to rise above that let us get a bit outside the box with each other. The fun of trying and learning has given huge satisfaction over the years. But it was clearly not my design of choice..thank goodness.

-Blush

M_lurkinghorror and Harold, I agree that it would be unsafe with a man the woman does not know very very well, but on this site we are talking about married couples, many of whom have been married for decades. In that context, it really isn't unsafe, it's fun. You can't just think about how unsafe sex is in a casual/short-term sex situation (which some might think is an unsafe situation in which to be having any kind of sex) and generalise from that.

It takes time and trust to get these sorts of dynamics going. I trully feel for the men who have replied to this article, despite being of totally the same persuasion as DeeMarie. We live in dangerous times, people can be fickle with their expressed wants and desires and alleged rapists are held in the lowest of the low class of criminal. You can, without trying to sound like a complete killjoy, understand their concerns!

I discovered that, turn off though it was initially, explaining that I enjoyed ravishment fantasy to a man I completely respected and trusted, saved the day. The rules were set. Once we built up our relationship and found ourselves trully compatable, his wariness turned to amusement and enjoyment, although when I asked for feedback (perhaps unwise with retrospect!), he said he enjoyed it because I did. Non-verbally, his body language indicated otherwise. I feel this is because he was uncomfortable with discussing it and men don't tend to like to analyse everything. So now we go with the flow. Sometimes he'll say, "I don't wish to hear any more about it, young lady....". I have taken this to mean, less talk and more action.

Now we get on with it. I get taken and he takes me. Instead of debating the use of "no" or its intonation, I'll say something like "....you won't get away with this you barbarian..." and wink at the same time. The wink excuses a random, abstract safeword like "scrambled eggs" which trully ruins the heat of the bodice ripping moment! It also avoids having to plough into further discussion. He is an alpha male and enjoys it. I love being taken and I enjoy it. The wink is a covert sign to proceed and avoids a lengthy, unnecessary debate.

As the Editor so correctly points out above, relationships on this website feature many long-term relationships where a great deal of trust has been established. I feel that were I to be single again, I would proceed with caution initially until I got to know a man, not only for my own safety, but for his too. It would be nice to believe that men are intuitive to all our senses, but sadly, this theory can sometimes be naive and eutopian. Plus you don't know if anything of this nature happened in a person's history (e.g. true abuse) until you get to know them better.

So, I'd do the homework first. It's boring, it's a turn off, etc... but at least you'll express what you want directly, know if the feeling is mutual or whether you're on dangerous territory, and can proceed. When you get the relationship you want, you can then gradually withdraw your plans, wishes and intents because intuition will be there and both parties can get on with it safe in the knowledge that this, for some, extremely pleasureable relationship dynamic can be just that.

This reminds me of some lines written by the gifted French poet André de Chénier (beheaded in 1794, at the age of 32):

"Votre bouche dit non,
Votre voix et vos yeux
Disent un mot plus doux
Et le disent bien mieux."

(Your mouth says no,your voice and your eyes say a sweeter word, and say it much better.)

Pierre-Olivier