Marywomenwant

At the beginning of the 20th century, Sigmund Freud wondered why the Victorian ladies of his time were so unhappy. Since his view of the human psyche was based on the sex urge, he suspected that something sexual was causing their emotional distress. "What do women really want?" became his famous inquiry. A century later, this question is still being asked. Recently, it has become especially urgent.

In the context of his sex-based psychology, Freud decided that women suffer from penis envy, and really want to be men. Several decades later, in The Feminine Mystique, Betty Friedan attacked Freud's "male chauvinist" view. She advised that instead of envying men, women should become more like them to be their equals. But identifying with men to achieve equality is really another form of envy, and is still a masculine view of women.

Before Friedan started the women's movement in America, Wilhelm Reich, a Freudian, started the sexual revolution that lead to Hugh Hefners's playboy-playmate philosophy and its promotion. The eventual fusion of the sexual revolution with the women's movement caused a seismic cultural shift. Then the former Puritan mentality that treated women as men's property gave way to the playboy mentality that treats women as men's playthingsa kind of property. At the same time, Friedan's leveling of female with male sexuality sent women straight into the captive arms of the playboy culture. The result was called "sexual freedom."

But genital "freedom" is not sexual freedom. Driven by a fear of sexual repression, libido liberation became "You must have sex frequently, or there is something wrong with you." The "must," however, does not signify sexual freedom; it means compulsory sex instead.

When Freud appeared on the historical scene, something had to be done about female sexual repression. And when Friedan entered the picture, something had to be done about women's inequality. But Freud misinterpreted human sexuality as basically a tissue energy rather than basically an energy of the soul. And Friedan misinterpreted equality as sameness. The result is the masculinized female who "controls her own body" in an overly masculine (unreceptive) way, because she is not really controlling her own mind. Both the Puritan individualistic, self-proving mentality, and the playboy sexual-performance mentality are controlling women's minds. And women are as unhappy as ever.

Wendy Shalit, a recent graduate of Williams College and author of A Return to Modesty, wonders how casual sex can possibly satisfy women. She noticed that women are hungry for love, and men prefer to just have sex. She discovered that women and men are different no matter what radical feminists say. Shalit wants to pull back from easy sex and return to a wholesomenot Victorianform of modesty so that men will, once again, become interested in love.

Danielle Crittenden, author of What Our Mothers Didn't Tell Us: Why Happiness Eludes the Modern Woman, also retreats from the sexual revolution. She complains that women now have the right to have sex with a man and never see him again, the right to be insulted and called demeaning names if they say no, and the right to catch a sexually transmitted disease that could leave them sterile. She insists that what women most want is a stable marriage to a faithful husband who will not abandon her and their children. But easy sex does not motivate men to make the needed and wanted commitment. So the sexual revolution has meant unhappiness for women. And F. Carolyn Graglia's
Domestic Tranquility: A Brief against Feminism joins in the growing revolt against the masculinized woman.

If you have to have sex and can't say no, what kind of sexual freedom is that? The modesty that women really want protects their need for love and is, for the sake of love, a way of saying no to premature, unmarried sex. This modesty challenges men to raise their center of gravity from the base of the torso to the higher level of the heart with the help of the brain. In this way, a boy grows up and becomes a man, instead of merely turning into a playboy.

Growing up is what men really want, often in spite of themselves. Much more sexual potency is required to remain erect in the heart for a lifelong commitment, than to remain otherwise erect for a one-night stand.

Women do not want a playboy type of sexual revolution. They really want a love revolution. And men want this, too; but only if women commit to "Know thyself, and to thine own self be true."

If men and women are not sexually different by nature, we are not really hetero- but homo-sexual. Sameness is a dysfunctional form of heterosexuality that breeds many other forms of sexual dysfunction including the identity confusion that can lead to homoeroticism.

Equality does not mean sameness. Even in the flatness of mathematics, 2+3 and 8-3 are different but equal: both are 5. Much more complexly and richly, living women and men are equal without being the same.

The female brain is organized differently from the male brain, and the female psyche responds differently than the male's. Generally, each accentswithout excludingopposite qualities, the better to integrate opposites such as gentleness and firmness, inward nurturing and outward performance. Each person, woman or man, needs a similar inner balance. Nevertheless, they are relational specialists. Their natures are organized with an emphasis that turns them toward each other for the bonding that begets, nurtures, and challenges their children. They are like our left hand and right hand: very similar, but structured by God to face each other in opposite directions in order to work together for a common purpose.

Before women can understand, however, both their difference from, and their equality with, men they need to claim their own brain organization and their own minds. Then they will be able to liberate themselves from the overly masculine Puritan and playboy mentalities that dominate contemporary feminism, and by which they "control their (healthy) bodies" as though they were fighting a diseasewith drugs and surgeries. They will be able to develop the true sexual freedom needed for natural conception regulation within a marital commitment. And they will have the wisdom, strength, and love to let men know that this is what they not only want, but also require.

An adolescent might think that love is a crush or an infatuation. But there is little or no love without good character. A grownup wants the kind of love that involves virtues of good judgment, justice, moderation, courage, knowledge, understanding, and wisdom.

Contrary to the contraceptive mentality, the greatest protector of love is not sex, but the virtue of chastity that keeps sex in its spousal "fireplace." When fire creeps up the walls and across the floor, filling the whole place with flames and smoke, destruction results. The same is true of our inner fires. Modesty and chastity give love a chance to grow and deepen. These virtues also sustain the lifelong sexual erection of the heart and mind required for marital commitment.

Beyond Freud and Friedan, a true understanding of sexual freedom and sexual equality is needed, now, in order to integrate the emotion of love with the virtues of good character. Then women can become happy people who know who they are and how to live. Then men can better understand women, the better to understand and become themselves as men, and become happier, too. This is not just a woman's dream. In answer to Freud's archetypal question, it is what women really want.



	Ethica Maria I've got a man's question: What do women really want? Can't figure it out. In responding to this question, Mary cannot resist getting philosophical about it. Check out this article: What Do Women Really Want? Mary R. Joyce At the beginning of the 20th century, Sigmund Freud wondered why the Victorian ladies of his time were so unhappy. Since his view of the human psyche was based on the sex urge, he suspected that something sexual was causing their emotional distress. "What do women really want?" became his famous inquiry. A century later, this question is still being asked. Recently, it has become especially urgent. Answers and Consequences In the context of his sex-based psychology, Freud decided that women suffer from penis envy, and really want to be men. Several decades later, in The Feminine Mystique, Betty Friedan attacked Freud's "male chauvinist" view. She advised that instead of envying men, women should become more like them to be their equals. But identifying with men to achieve equality is really another form of envy, and is still a masculine view of women. Before Friedan started the women's movement in America, Wilhelm Reich, a Freudian, started the sexual revolution that lead to Hugh Hefners's playboy-playmate philosophy and its promotion. The eventual fusion of the sexual revolution with the women's movement caused a seismic cultural shift. Then the former Puritan mentality that treated women as men's property gave way to the playboy mentality that treats women as men's playthingsa kind of property. At the same time, Friedan's leveling of female with male sexuality sent women straight into the captive arms of the playboy culture. The result was called "sexual freedom." But genital "freedom" is not sexual freedom. Driven by a fear of sexual repression, libido liberation became "You must have sex frequently, or there is something wrong with you." The "must," however, does not signify sexual freedom; it means compulsory sex instead. When Freud appeared on the historical scene, something had to be done about female sexual repression. And when Friedan entered the picture, something had to be done about women's inequality. But Freud misinterpreted human sexuality as basically a tissue energy rather than basically an energy of the soul. And Friedan misinterpreted equality as sameness. The result is the masculinized female who "controls her own body" in an overly masculine (unreceptive) way, because she is not really controlling her own mind. Both the Puritan individualistic, self-proving mentality, and the playboy sexual-performance mentality are controlling women's minds. And women are as unhappy as ever. But some women are finally beginning to ask, from a woman's point of view, "What do we really want?" The Backlash Wendy Shalit, a recent graduate of Williams College and author of A Return to Modesty, wonders how casual sex can possibly satisfy women. She noticed that women are hungry for love, and men prefer to just have sex. She discovered that women and men are different no matter what radical feminists say. Shalit wants to pull back from easy sex and return to a wholesomenot Victorianform of modesty so that men will, once again, become interested in love. Danielle Crittenden, author of What Our Mothers Didn't Tell Us: Why Happiness Eludes the Modern Woman, also retreats from the sexual revolution. She complains that women now have the right to have sex with a man and never see him again, the right to be insulted and called demeaning names if they say no, and the right to catch a sexually transmitted disease that could leave them sterile. She insists that what women most want is a stable marriage to a faithful husband who will not abandon her and their children. But easy sex does not motivate men to make the needed and wanted commitment. So the sexual revolution has meant unhappiness for women. And F. Carolyn Graglia's Domestic Tranquility: A Brief against Feminism joins in the growing revolt against the masculinized woman. Women Want True Sexual Freedom If you have to have sex and can't say no, what kind of sexual freedom is that? The modesty that women really want protects their need for love and is, for the sake of love, a way of saying no to premature, unmarried sex. This modesty challenges men to raise their center of gravity from the base of the torso to the higher level of the heart with the help of the brain. In this way, a boy grows up and becomes a man, instead of merely turning into a playboy. Growing up is what men really want, often in spite of themselves. Much more sexual potency is required to remain erect in the heart for a lifelong commitment, than to remain otherwise erect for a one-night stand. Women do not want a playboy type of sexual revolution. They really want a love revolution. And men want this, too; but only if women commit to "Know thyself, and to thine own self be true." Women Want True Equality If men and women are not sexually different by nature, we are not really hetero- but homo-sexual. Sameness is a dysfunctional form of heterosexuality that breeds many other forms of sexual dysfunction including the identity confusion that can lead to homoeroticism. Equality does not mean sameness. Even in the flatness of mathematics, 2+3 and 8-3 are different but equal: both are 5. Much more complexly and richly, living women and men are equal without being the same. The female brain is organized differently from the male brain, and the female psyche responds differently than the male's. Generally, each accentswithout excludingopposite qualities, the better to integrate opposites such as gentleness and firmness, inward nurturing and outward performance. Each person, woman or man, needs a similar inner balance. Nevertheless, they are relational specialists. Their natures are organized with an emphasis that turns them toward each other for the bonding that begets, nurtures, and challenges their children. They are like our left hand and right hand: very similar, but structured by God to face each other in opposite directions in order to work together for a common purpose. Before women can understand, however, both their difference from, and their equality with, men they need to claim their own brain organization and their own minds. Then they will be able to liberate themselves from the overly masculine Puritan and playboy mentalities that dominate contemporary feminism, and by which they "control their (healthy) bodies" as though they were fighting a diseasewith drugs and surgeries. They will be able to develop the true sexual freedom needed for natural conception regulation within a marital commitment. And they will have the wisdom, strength, and love to let men know that this is what they not only want, but also require. A Love Revolution An adolescent might think that love is a crush or an infatuation. But there is little or no love without good character. A grownup wants the kind of love that involves virtues of good judgment, justice, moderation, courage, knowledge, understanding, and wisdom. Contrary to the contraceptive mentality, the greatest protector of love is not sex, but the virtue of chastity that keeps sex in its spousal "fireplace." When fire creeps up the walls and across the floor, filling the whole place with flames and smoke, destruction results. The same is true of our inner fires. Modesty and chastity give love a chance to grow and deepen. These virtues also sustain the lifelong sexual erection of the heart and mind required for marital commitment. Conclusion Beyond Freud and Friedan, a true understanding of sexual freedom and sexual equality is needed, now, in order to integrate the emotion of love with the virtues of good character. Then women can become happy people who know who they are and how to live. Then men can better understand women, the better to understand and become themselves as men, and become happier, too. This is not just a woman's dream. In answer to Freud's archetypal question, it is what women really want. ***** HOME

		This article is copyrighted by the NaProEthics Forum, Omaha, Nebraska, and is posted with permission.