7 + 1 Ways to F*ck a Woman’s Mind. {NSFW} ~ David Esotica

Via on Oct 18, 2012

Update: a rebuttal, via Kate Bartolotta. 7 + 1 Reasons Not to F*ck a Woman’s Mind. {NSFW}

And David’s partner tells her side of the story: More than 7 + 1 Ways: A Closer Look. 

~

A woman’s sex is all mental.

Everything lies in her experience.

In her immersion—when her body, her soul, her spirit are engulfed in a wave of crashing ecstasy. Warm, warped, heated, burnt. Sear her experience with a burning fire and all things change. Everything changes.

Do not focus on the physical, the technique. All of your actions are whispers. What is essential is the sharpness of intent. Raw, brooding action. And reaction. A man’s movement is to be an expression of passionate force.

So then. Here are seven ways to fuck a woman’s mind, in no particular order:

1. Softly, sweetly. Almost serene. For all her thorns and daggers, every woman holds a fragile part. She may hide it, for fear of finding herself vulnerable. We do this, too. Caress her, whisper into her ear. Softer than the faintest, gentlest touch. Tender words whispered in her ear. More than just words. A sweet song, embers; roaring heat drifting from a fire into her ear.

2. Assertive. A delicate, yet crude dance. A hand wrapping around her hips and turning her front toward you. A softness and a firmness. Care taken whilst taking what you she offers up.

3. Swiftly. A firm grip that pulls her backwards and penetrates her in a whirlwind of motion. Footholds lost, hips a swinging fulcrum. Vapors of a gasp disappearing in a flash of movement. A jolt, a shake. Sharp, sudden, piercing.

4. Slowly, strongly. Firm hands digging into limbs. A tight grip pinning down wrists. Slow, forceful movements. Contemplative. Deliberate. Thumbs pressing into soft thighs. Hips open like hinges. Complete presence in the stillness.

5. Painfully. Cruel nails grinding down the sides of her ribs. Gripping onto the bone of her hips. Digging into the soft flesh of her waist.

6. Animalistic. A deep, unconscious rhythm from deep in the spine. Rising to the surface.

7. Lovingly. Penetrating, a thunder of emotion crunching through the eyes.

My girl.

There is the point where it all implodes. A thing to behold—the moment when she curls up, reeling from the burst of emotion. Orgasmic energy throbbing down her limbs. Pressing into her chest, soft sobbing begins to seep up, tears sparkling in soft candlelight.

There we go. Fucking beautiful.

There is a point when it all comes out. Every woman reaches a point when she comes, deeper and harder than she thought possible. Her body and her soul open unleashing a storm. Through her tears she quenches an ancient, longing thirst.

This leads us to a beautiful truth about the feminine—every woman is in pain.

It is a pain that goes deeper than the reach of any brutal force or cold analysis. It is something wrapped inside her, around her spine, engulfing her chest. But it is not something to be feared. This is a beautiful agony.

It emerges when she feels that hunger.

A hunger to be loved and cherished. To blossom. To feel. To touch.

And yes, to be ravished.

She feels it in anticipation and in deep harmony. It comes during times of loss, despair and fear. It groans in her sex, screaming in her thrill. It drives into her skin with touch. It deepens with burning love.

Yes, pain, pleasure and love, intricately entwined in this ethereal dance.

And from this, we find the next step in delicious life, love and sex.

The eighth way is to fuck her with deep compassion.

Compassion, as I see it, is my ability to understand your pain. To feel it. To embody it. It is the doorway to spirit.

There is the way I will reach out and touch you. It envelopes the other seven ways. It wraps around our limbs, across our skin, and binds myself into you.

Yes, this is how I can hold you, take you and claim you. This will draw me to you. It will drive me into you.

But you are the one who must invite me.

You must let it happen.

And here is my invite to you and to every woman on the planet.

What will make me come to a woman is not her sex, nor her elegance, nor her strength, nor her brilliant intelligence. It is her openness. How prepared she is to feel that groan, that pain. Feel it, and express it. That is the key.

Do this, and I will know.

Yes, this is a woman who feels deeply. Yes, she engulfs herself in an ocean of love and passion. Yes, this is the one.

And thus, you become a thing to behold. A beautiful creature, curled up, reeling from the burst of catharsis. Fucking beautiful.

What it means to penetrate a woman like this? Difficult to describe. It is simple to simplify, to leave it as a groaning in my cock and balls. In many a sense, this is true, but only partially true.

I suppose I could use the old throwaway words—polarity, masculine and feminine. In a way, they tell us that something exists. There are labels there.

But oh, feeling it is something else entirely.

Gripping ecstasy borne from ancient, primal flesh. A solemn reminder from my body, this sacred quintessence of dust. To be grasped by it, to be driven with it. To be overwhelmed by simple lust.

But oh, there is another place. Another longing. To find the beauty in it. The magic of it.

Drive that stake deep enough into my heart, and you see my soul. For I am forced to move with a single, potent purpose. The sharpness of my action places me in an empty flow. No thoughts distract me. Only instinct. Only my saliva, my blood and my dust.

And therein lies the compassion of my conquest. At a point my singular precision implodes. And I will see the beauty of it. I will sense the burning inside you. I will feel the orgasm erupting within you. I will see you. Look at me. My eyes will write a thousand lines of poetry. Your surrender has conquered me. Your grace has slain me. Your ethereal softness has overpowered me.

From here, there is only us, and only this.

 

David Esotica works with his partner, Diana, to help women find the earth shattering relationships they crave.They believe in laughing, crying, passion and orgasms. So you can imagine what happens when they talk about sex.  Check out David’s Facebook page Red Silk and his blog David Esotica.

 

 

~

Editor: Lori Lothian

 

Like Elephant Love on Facebook!

 

About elephant journal

elephant journal is dedicated to "bringing together those working (and playing) to create enlightened society." We're about anything that helps us to live a good life that's also good for others, and our planet. >>> Founded as a print magazine in 2002, we went national in 2005 and then (because mainstream magazine distribution is wildly inefficient from an eco-responsible point of view) transitioned online in 2009. >>> elephant's been named to 30 top new media lists, and was voted #1 in the US on twitter's Shorty Awards for #green content...two years running. >>> Get involved: > Subscribe to our free Best of the Week e-newsletter. > Follow us on Twitter Fan us on Facebook. > Write: send article or query. > Advertise. > Pay for what you read, help indie journalism survive and thrive. Questions? info elephantjournal com

84,723 views

Appreciate this article? Support indie media!

(We use super-secure PayPal - but don't worry - you don't need an account with PayPal.)

92 Responses to “7 + 1 Ways to F*ck a Woman’s Mind. {NSFW} ~ David Esotica”

  1. Sara says:

    Brilliant! Sensitive and compelling.

  2. Amanda says:

    Yowza. Makes me wanna read it again! Beautifully written.

  3. Angela Major says:

    Perfect and beautiful.

  4. mfpfaff says:

    Whew! I need a cold shower after reading this. And then I will read it again.

  5. Amandaji says:

    Damn, (sigh) Thank You! I am much better now ;)

  6. rross says:

    It is concerning and offensive the submission that is supposed to be a woman's sexuality in this article. I think it deserves definite critical reflection from its writer and, especially, from readers. Please do not confuse our culture's enforcement of male domination with female sexuality. Empowerment is within one's personal experience, undoubtedly, but this article defines and imposes a single experience of sexuality, and one that assumes and encourages female subordination. Your possessiveness doesn't make me come. It makes me cringe, no–it makes me cry, cry at those claiming to " help women find the earth shattering relationships they crave" while explicitly denying any women empowerment or agency, sexual or otherwise.

    • Kim Rome says:

      Surrender is not submission. The courage to open the pure vulnerability for true surrender is beyond empowerment. It is strength receiving. What this author is describing is beyond ideology. This is alchemy of the soul.

    • Lori Ann Lothian says:

      My comment on Kate's rebuttal piece, might shed light here. I am responding to a reader who noted that the article was addressing not every woman, but the archteypal feminine.

      This is the first comment on either piece I have read, (mine comments excluded) that steps back and looks at the bigger picture instead of getting ensared in the details. Yes roamingbard, I as well (as editor of this piece) understood the "woman in pain" comment to address the archetypal feminine, which IS IN PAIN. I will be writing my own piece on this, because the wounded feminine (and masculine) is a big part of what this planet is healing as we learn to move beyond a patriarchy that has raped the planet; and an apparently fertility-worshipping matriarchy that we only distantly recall in prehistory.

      To me, David's piece was moving past the partriarchical archtype of woman as slut or virgin, whore or saint. It was reaching (perhaps over-reaching) to the feminine archetype that embraces the holy-wholeness of both carnal and sacred…that liminal place between extremes where a third possibility is born….

      There is a collective urge for the birth of a new masculine and feminine. We are perhaps clumsy in feeing our way, and expressing our way, to that emergent collaboration, an elevated matriimony that this planet urgently needs.

      I've commissioned a piece by a writer (female) who has written a book on Jungian archetypes, to decontstruct why David's piece is such a hot potato.

      I will be writing my own piece as well, exploring this cultural phenomenon of surrender-submissive feminine that caught fire with Fifty Shades…and what it is really (clumsily) pointing to.

      Thanks again for your comments.

      LA

    • bikesandmath says:

      I couldn't agree with you more, rross. It's actually really insulting that, as a woman and more importantly, as an individual, such a bold statement is made as to imply submission is the assumed way to a meaningful sexual experience. Each person is different and every couple have a dynamic that is acutely personal to them. I can tell you which earth shattering relationship I crave – the wonderful and sexually charged one I have with my boyfriend… and possessiveness (demanded or given freely) plays no role in that.

      • solfulsoul says:

        love is a vulnerability and trust is your only safeguard.. you can hold on to it as long as you like no one will blame you.. but "giving in" is a while new world of pleasure and trust… with true submission there is no predetermined role or pre-planned domination and possession; love and duty is for all, but romance is only for the faithful.

    • onesadhaka says:

      tell it!

  7. Meghan says:

    Absolutely love this. And want it in my life.

  8. [...] I first read David Esotica’s article, I was annoyed. Then, I really started to get angry. Who the fuck are you to decide what all women [...]

  9. Charolette Stoehr says:

    I agree with rross. When I began the article I anticipated an intelligent discourse on how sexuality really begins in the mind. I resonated with what the article says about a woman being really open as beautiful and engaging, as well as being wiling to go there to that place inside that is so deep we never show anyone sometimes not even ourselves. I was really disappointed however to read the actual portrayal of how the author sees "taking" a woman will get her to that place. It is a classic portrayal of women being submissive to a dominant or aggressive partner. I knew at that point exactly who the author of this article was without even reading his name. This author continues to miss the mark…he comes close but then misses.

  10. Guest says:

    This is offensive and the same crap we women are constantly subjected to. I am frustrated teh Elephant Journal thinks this is an appropriate post.

    • Lori Ann Lothian says:

      As the editor for this piece, I find it interesting to view the range of responses. EJ had an editorial discussion around this piece, and in particular, I had the author flesh it out so that as one of our "reviewers" noted, she could feel his heart along with his cock.

      The idea of "appropriate" means there is a box beyond which EJ should not venture. Yet our motto is the mindful life, not the cloistered one. What being mindful means, to me, as an editor, is allowing a diversity of expression; encouraging communication and debate with the intent to create bridges of understanding; and publishing quality writing with powerful messages.

      In my own life, I try to live by the rule of ahimsha, do no harm. This piece of writing is not causing harm. It is stirring up dialogue. And that can only be a good thing.

      It is interesting to see how many women readers responded positively to this piece. For those readers who object, mindfulness might entail looking both at why you dislike the piece so much–and considering as well, why so many others like it.

      Lori Ann
      editor,
      elephant love and relationships

      • onlyonelikethis says:

        I know no matter what articles written will always have people who disagree, but I have seen numerous articles in EJ more than any other blog that I find in poor taste and offensive. In these cases I think it would serve EJ well to listen to it's complaints. Stirring up dialog is not always a good thing. Is that all you're after? So, you say, many people like it. Many people don't. Many are actually offended and yet EJ presses on.

        • Repost here of comment I made on comment thread for the original article. I will add that offensive is in the eye of the beholder. Many readers liked or even LOVED the piece that you see as poor taste.

          Hi Charlotte:

          One reason we did publish this was because–if you haven't noticed– BDSM has gone full bore into the mainstream already with Fifty Shades, 60 million copies. Even Cosmo had a BDSM issue recently. And our recent piece on the 6 myths of BDSM was very well received by our readership. (http://www.elephantjournal.com/2012/10/six-myths-about-kinkbdsm-lyla-cicero/)

          To say editorially we should define our audience by what will have universal appeal, is silly. There will always be those readers who don't like something a magazine chooses to publish. In this case, David's piece is at 5,600 views (a hit) because it is being read, and shared. If you look at the comments here, as many if not more readers like the piece than don't.

          As editors we will make mistakes too in our choices. Yet when an article does well by reaching this many views, it's usually because it is hitting a nerve (in your case?) or a chord (in the case of readers who loved it).

          thanks for sharing and taking the time to comment.

          Lori Ann
          editor
          elephant love and relationships

  11. dan says:

    glorified mutual masturbation: for him she's a mechanism he's in control of; for her, a hands free dildo; both using the imitation of connection to make the intimacy seem real; both whilst yet insisting their mutual manufacture is as potable as it is disposable.
    don't get your rocks off, throw them to the sea, the volcano; they'll be fine, and you'll have that much less to carry

  12. shelleyreece says:

    This is what sex is for me…. *sigh* I wish more men understood it and could penetrate to the heart of "me" so surely as this piece did. I wish more women were open enough to their softer, vulnerable sides, to allow this sort of intimacy into their lives.

    • timful says:

      But, wouldn't it be even better if a man understood you, shelleyreece, not some recipe for pushing women's buttons?

      • shelleyreece says:

        I don't see this as a recipe, timful. Rather, it is a poem that resonated with those of us for whom our primal wild selves are true and honest expressions of who we really are. My personal life philosophy revolves around remaining true to the warm, soft, female animal that I am, and a man who cannot understand that about me, cannot understand my sexuality, cannot understand me. The man who wrote this piece was able to demonstrate that he is attuned to his own animal self, and the women that responded likewise, are in tune with theirs. This piece was like a Wolf's howl in the night. The women that run with Wolves heard it and responded. The rest covered their ears and thanked God for the hollow safety of their four walls, the boxes that contain their rioting minds.

        • timful says:

          It was the 7 point instructional format that made me think recipe. That was my objection. That men and women who do not engage this way naturally might imagine they should. I hear a bit of that in your comment as well, as if this is our true nature, but for those who deny or hide from it. I have no problem if that is his authentic nature and if it engages well with yours. But, it should have been titled "How I take my women," or something like that.

        • David Esotica says:

          Thank you Shelley Reece. Will keep the shrill voice alive to thrill the likes of you.

  13. Carol Horton carolhortonbooks says:

    This guy could make a fortune writing romance novels.

  14. Rianne says:

    Aside from all the other comments on this article, what really struck me is the heterosnormativity ere. The implied statement that all women, at least from time to time just need a man with his masculine energies to come and ravish them.

    • BrightBlue says:

      Yup, as always. Not only is it sweepingly heteronormative, but it is also pretty BORING: women just want to be taken by a strong, commanding yet loving man. Yup, I think I read that in like EVERY SINGLE ROMANCE novel there is. I 'm sure there are women like this and further, I'm sure that most people, once in a while, would like to be "taken and penetrated". Sure. But, does that mean that all women are in pain and must be permitted to be vulnerable to your PENETRATING (JESUS, how many times is that word in this article??)? Sure, and throw the word compassion and hey! now we have a spiritual Elephant article? I'm grossed out by this and would like to read something that wasn't lifted from the pages of GQ.

  15. yogabeast says:

    This is creepsters to me. The photo of a man's hand around a woman's throat? I'll not likely read anything by Mr. "Esotica" again. But, cool pen name I guess and there's nothing wrong with stirring folks up. Just can't stomach this.

  16. [...] 7 + 1 Ways to F*ck a Woman’s Mind. {NSFW} ~ David Esotica (elephantjournal.com) [...]

  17. Muks says:

    I am sitting here frowning, not turned on at all! I dislike women being described as that passive, wanted to be ravished. This is definitely not what I want. The pictures are not making the article any better, especially the cleavage without face.

  18. Mymble says:

    David, I had a look at your website now, and it seems quite clear that your are rooted in the BDSM world. You call yourself commander and master.

    That's fine, and being a sub myself, I can relate to the things you're posting. You write in one of the comments on Kate's rebuttal, you will only want to be with a woman who wants to surrender the way you're describing. That's perfectly fine – I myself would never want to be in a relationship without an aspect of surrender – or rather submission – from my part. I am now in a relationship where I experience this, and it has made me content, happy and liberated.

    However, it is important to understand that not all women want this. Some women want to be "overpowered", some women want to be the ones who "overpower", and others have no wish to experience any of these things. Sexuality is wonderfully diverse thing, and that is why I find your article disturbing. You seem oblivious to the fact that women are just as diverse as men.

    PEOPLE are diverse! People do not all want the same thing.

    • David Esotica says:

      Thank you Mymble, you make a very, very good point. I do not get involved with the BDSM scene, but I understand the dynamics. I read a lot of material and incorporate it into my sex life. Use of pain and safe words are used, but it is only one of my tastes.

      You are quite correct that women are very diverse. I suppose that my piece was written for the women who were ready to respond to it. For them, it is meant to cut deeply and pierce them in a place that is seldom touched.

      I would add, however, that even more powerful is a surrender of a strong-willed woman. My partner belongs here. I think it is safe to say that she is completely converted to sexual submission. Had she read my piece 6 months ago she would have wanted to tear me apart in the comments. A conquest of such a woman is complex and invites many projections. I would have to write 100 articles to cover all of the nuances.

      • Mymble says:

        Of course, it's impossible to cover all areas in one article, but if you only would have added a point about this being an article that are supposed to speak to SOME women, not women in general, you could have avoided offending people and making them feel that you operate with inflexible, predetermined gender roles.

        To clarify – when I say BDSM, I'm pointing to the mechanisms of surrender, not the whole "scene". That BDSM doesn't necessarily involve leather, whips and chains, theatrical utterances, dungeons and special nightclubs, is something I always emphasize when I have the chance :) Personally, I don't even want a safe word. Precisely because this whole thing is about a shared experience, compassion, openness, safety – and union.

        • David Esotica says:

          I could talk about this at length, but judging from the responses, posting another article will stir up even more discussion :)

          I used "all women" instead of "some women" as a language device. For effect. Notice how it amplified the intensity of the responses.

          Thank you for your contributions Mymble.

      • Guest says:

        I have to say, I don't like the "conquest" theme here. Women don't exist for men to conquer, and I think you have drastically oversimplified women as a whole with your sweeping generalizations. I also don't like the implication that a woman's worth is measured by her orgasms. Every woman is different, and there are women out there who are not able to have orgasms–it doesn't mean their hearts are closed off or that they are unworthy of love. What bothers me most about this article is there is nothing about what men should give to women. It's all about "taking" and "dominating", when really in sex it has to be a two-way street–of giving, loving, sharing, vulnerability and ultimate surrender.

  19. Edward Staskus says:

    Some of these ideas seem to come out of The Story of O, a send-up popular in the 1950s. I assume you are being serious, but if it is all mental, as you say, why the "cruel nails"?

    • David Esotica says:

      When pain and pleasure come together, they are processed mentally. There is subtext in the dynamics, and this amplifies the sensations.

  20. The comment range here runs from appreciation to scorn, which means the article has struck both a collective nerve and chord. There is not much in the middle, where discourse is about the bigger picture. I see this piece as having social significance beyond the BDSM overtones—in fact, perhaps addressing the loss of sexuality polarity between men and women in an age where women are expected to be as powerful in business and career as men, while also retaining our femininity, and receptivity. Fifty Shades was a hit, to the tune of 60 milllion sold copies, because women readers were compelled, fascinated and curious, not to mention turned on, by Anastasia's submission to a dom. Yet that poorly written book was an extreme, and it did not really hit the mark for most intelligent and strong women who perhaps yearned not for submission, but for a deeper surrender in sexual contact with a beloved.

    And yes, men too can surrender or want to experience surrender. It's not about gender. It's about receptive vs active polarities.

    Lori Ann
    elephant love and relationships
    editor

    • BrightBlue says:

      Is a "polarity" really necessary to great sex?? Is there really a "loss of polarity" between men and women? maybe the problem is NOT that women are expected to be powerful but receptive (why can't a person be flexible) but that men refuse to. Instead of helping women find their vulnerability so they can be penetrated, maybe we should help men be receptive to powerful women so that every gender can be as vulnerable or powerful, receptive or active as they wish IN THAT MOMENT? Everything else is just gender-reinforcing bull.

  21. ALSO. Repost for to a particluar to a comment that this was an inappropriate piece for EJ to publish.

    As the editor for this piece, I find it interesting to view the range of responses. EJ had an editorial discussion around this piece, and in particular, I had the author flesh it out so that as one of our "reviewers" noted, she could feel his heart along with his cock.

    The idea of "appropriate" means there is a box beyond which EJ should not venture. Yet our motto is the mindful life, not the cloistered one. What being mindful means, to me, as an editor, is allowing a diversity of expression; encouraging communication and debate with the intent to create bridges of understanding; and publishing quality writing with powerful messages.

    In my own life, I try to live by the rule of ahimsha, do no harm. This piece of writing is not causing harm. It is stirring up dialogue. And that can only be a good thing.

    It is interesting to see how many women readers responded positively to this piece. For those readers who object, mindfulness might entail looking both at why you dislike the piece so much–and considering as well, why so many others like it.

    Lori Ann

    • BrightBlue says:

      You could publish a lot of things that would "stir up dialogue"? Why this one? What is "mindful" about the same old "ravish your woman" advice? I think we're expecting something a little more progressive, a little more mindful and a little more goddamned interesting from EJ.

  22. ozzman says:

    Pretty standard David Deida litany, with a touch of 'Grey'

  23. Gail says:

    I agree with creating bridges of understanding… Is it so wrong to honestly share an experience, for wrong or for right, whether anyone likes it or not – just lightly and simply take what resonates and drop the rest! We are all unique individuals and sexuality with all its tangible intangibles is intrinsic to that in its pure Nature. As the author agrees there are many forms to a man or womans sexuality and this is an excerpt of one – so beautifully expressed (thank you for you and yes I could feel the man yearning for a womans surrender and I could feel the woman, wrapped in pain wanting a man who will go there with her – that was my experience of your article) I look forward to the day when we are simply expressing our sincere, raw and beautiful truths to each other – and as recipients we can listen, receive, imbibe, share, say thank you and or move on – especially as the editor puts it…it means no harm

  24. Auki says:

    Soft porn reins on EJ. I thought this website was for Yoga and spirituality. I will never recommend or link anyone to this website.

    • Lori Ann Lothian says:

      Auki:

      EJ began with a Buddhist slant, moved into Yoga as well, and if you look at our main page, you will notice we now have subpages for everything from "ove and relationships to food to health to money to enivironment. EJ s growing, and its readers are growing with it as we triple our page views each year. I'm sorry that your experience of EJ is not your cup of tea–it's not soft porn here, it's diversity and range of material. Below, my response to one other grumpy reader.

      The idea of "appropriate" means there is a box beyond which EJ should not venture. Yet our motto is the mindful life, not the cloistered one. What being mindful means, to me, as an editor, is allowing a diversity of expression; encouraging communication and debate with the intent to create bridges of understanding; and publishing quality writing with powerful messages.

      In my own life, I try to live by the rule of ahimsha, do no harm. This piece of writing is not causing harm. It is stirring up dialogue. And that can only be a good thing.

      It is interesting to see how many women readers responded positively to this piece. For those readers who object, mindfulness might entail looking both at why you dislike the piece so much–and considering as well, why so many others like it. "

      Lori Ann
      editor, elephant Journal
      love and relationships

      • BrightBlue says:

        MIndfulness might entail why this piece is anything other than same old mainstream GQ and Cosmo relationship advice. Any number of things on elephant could stir up discussion. The question is how this fits with Elephant values and the oveall view?

  25. Intimit says:

    I see this piece as being about connection, the sex is a metaphor and it doesn't speak of subjugation but of presence, recognition, sharing and connection. Don't be so literal in the reading of it but dare I say open your minds!

    • BrightBlue says:

      Hard not to be literal when the author must find a way to say "penetrate" no less than three times in a short piece.

  26. Charolette says:

    I would not use the term "inappropriate" for publication on EJ…I would use the term "wrong venue." I understand the attraction for a good debate. I also understand and have been part of BDSM culture. To write articles with BDSM characteristics for an audience that is unknown or mainstream is not a good choice for an author, publisher or audience. This article is doing a disservice to the EJ audience as well as any BDSM culture by sugar coating it's true message to try and pass it off to the majority as something all women desire. We can't condone an article just on the basis of creating a debate or discussion when that article is repelling an audience. The first rule of a well written essay is to know your audience! When I read that a discussion by EJ took place before publishing this article and then they proceeded with publishing it…well that is disheartening. I don't read EJ any more because of this article, I read it less. Now I will be checking who the author is before reading as well.

    • Hi Charlotte:

      One reason we did publish this was because–if you haven't noticed– BDSM has gone full bore into the mainstream already with Fifty Shades, 60 million copies. Even Cosmo had a BDSM issue recently. And our recent piece on the 6 myths of BDSM was very well received by our readership. (http://www.elephantjournal.com/2012/10/six-myths-about-kinkbdsm-lyla-cicero/)

      To say editorially we should define our audience by what will have universal appeal, is silly. There will always be those readers who don't like something a magazine chooses to publish. In this case, David's piece is at 5,600 views (a hit) because it is being read, and shared. If you look at the comments here, as many if not more readers like the piece than don't.

      As editors we will make mistakes too in our choices. Yet when an article does well by reaching this many views, it's usually because it is hitting a nerve (in your case?) or a chord (in the case of readers who loved it).

      thanks for sharing and taking the time to comment.

      Lori Ann
      editor
      elephant love and relationships

      • Charolette says:

        Lori,
        It seems that you missed what I was trying to point out here. If it is about BDSM then say it is! I must have missed the BDSM article on the yoga and love page…was it on the controversial page? This has been feeling like a mind f***k of a different kind for a while now. First the disguised article and now the editorial responses. Congratulations on increasing your views! I am moving on.

  27. Kathleen says:

    I have 2 + 1 sweeping problems with this article: the title and the first line. "A woman's sex is all mental" implies (to me) that I should simply think myself to orgasm and cut out the middleman. It also implies that the author has some kind of heretofore unknown personal experience in the sexual experience of women. I have some basic, anatomical doubts about that.

    The truly offensive part to me is the title, 7 1 Ways to F*ck a Woman's Mind. Perhaps I have a more sensitive grasp of popular culture than the author (unlikely, since I don't go in for it much), but last time I checked "mindf*cking" was a kind of power play, designed to confuse and obfuscate the truth. It further implies that, as a woman, my mind is so simple and I am so wrapped up in it that by using a simple "cheat sheet" of 7 + 1 "tricks" a man can enter my intimate personal mental space regardless of my consent.

    Finally, has David Esotica stopped to consider that he just advised men not to worry about their sexual technique, but just come at it with "sharpness of intent" and you'll just blow her f*cking mind?

    • Yes, the title is ocntentious. I think the idea is that sex is as much in the mind as it is in the body. It was a play on the popular phrase, mind fuck, vs a literal version.

      Your last line made me LOL. You could argue no technique is great without intention to engage fully…

      Thanks for comments.

      Lori Ann
      EJ editor

    • Booster Blake says:

      I believe that one of the biggest challenges many men face in lovemaking is a tendency to focus on technique vs. the quality of the connection. The focus of David's article really is about presence and staying connected with the experience one's partner is having vs. trying to poke around and find her buttons.

  28. gem says:

    Soooo hot!!! keep writing, pay no mind to the haters.

  29. David Esotica says:

    With a response like that how can I not.

  30. onlyonelikethis says:

    A lot of women find this type of male power trip boring, played out and a complete nuisance. Just saying in case any guys really believe this is "every woman"…it's not. And I'm an adult entertainer.

  31. Susan says:

    "A women's sex is all mental" Um, no it's not.
    "…sobbing begins to seep up, tears sparkling in soft candlelight." maybe in high school.
    "…all women are in pain" No, we're not. That's just your middle-aged wet dream.

    Fucking ridiculous.
    More misogyny disguised as erotica. Mr "Esotica" is clueless.

  32. Londa says:

    I work with sexual assault victims. We always tell them to listen to their gut. When I read this, mine clenched up tighter than a fist and I felt sickened.
    The idea of "appropriate" means there is a box beyond which EJ should not venture.
    You're right, there is that box and it's labeled "Rape Culture".
    Although I only subscribed a month ago, Elephant Journal has been my self care escape during the day. It was always "safe" and I usually left feeling enlightened. Not today. Not at all. I'm leaving feeling disgusted and sad.

    • Hello Londa:

      Escape zone and safety zone are what I hear you wanting EJ to be for you. Yet, the choice to read a piece that you are not enjoying is your choice. If you must play the Rape Culture card (a huge stretch here) there is a thing too called "victim culture"…being a victim of your choice to read a piece but to project the responsibility on others, in this case EJ editorial.

      EJ presents many facets of reality and respresents many kinds of readers. Some would object for instance to LGBT lifestyle material on our site, which do also cover, or the upcoming series on Men and Pornography (pro and con) which we are doing in conjunction with The Good Men Project.

      Bottomline, is, if you don't like it, don't read it. Why throw a baby out with the bathwater, and ditch the whole magazine because one article, in one subsection, (or a few) are not to your taste? (PS: that is also why we label pieces Adult, or NSFW –not safe for work– or Nudity. To forewarn our reader before they click the link.

      Lori Ann
      elephant love and relationships
      editor

      • Booster Blake says:

        Nice response Lori. Thanks for the sanity.

        Londa- I deeply appreciate your consideration of those women who have suffered sexual trauma. The fact that you had a visceral contraction in response to the article's content could be an opportunity to get curious about yourself. Clearly by the comments many women found the article to be very insightful and inspirational. But you didn't. And that's totally ok, but if I were you, I might be curious about the experience these other women are having. There's seems to be a bit more enjoyable than a stomach with a clenched fist.

  33. [...] a picture of a scantily-clad woman, have a title promoting the “Three Easy Steps to Being a Mega Sex-Machine” and bandy about the words cock and pussy and BAM! Instant elephant [...]

  34. Heather says:

    You dig your nails into me and I'll l knock your teeth out.

    • Just curious. Is it okay for you to dig your nails into your lover? (assuming its a male). I kind of like equality here, and I sure have done some nail digging into my men over the years….

  35. [...] latest piece 7 + 1 Ways to F*ck a Woman’s Mind divided his [...]

  36. Gladys SBraun says:

    Thank you for your words, the poetry showing the dance of the energy that we can participate in if we choose. I get it. I feel the beauty of surrender, trust, openness and receiving in what you have written. Your words express what I desire and at the same time, I understand how it can create fear. Life can create fear. Surrender can create discomfort. Yet we accept, even encourage total surrender on the meditation pillow, but when we talk about surrender on our lover’s pillow, some see it as violent and intrusive. This is where I’ve found pleasure in surrender, with my lover, allowing the yin energy to surge through me, opening and receiving, allowing myself to be "taken". This is where I have allowed the interplay of light and dark, accepting every desire that runs through my body, accepting the totality of who I am, including that which some have banished to the dark side. This is where I have been able to look into another’s eyes, and saw the Divine – and in seeing the Divine, I have desired and allowed myself to be ravished. Trust. Openness. Surrender. Thank you for showing what this looks like in the arms of a lover.

  37. Joe Sparks says:

    Women's liberation has been sold as women having the choice to have sex any way they want. Because they appear to get a choice, they're "liberated." Essentially women are being offered men's distresses as progress. Well it's equality in a certain sense (laughter), but I don't think it's what we are after. It show how our society is sexualizing us. Most women want more than this from a man.

  38. [...] what we consider “normal.” There are also a lot of questions about the most mundane and boring elements of human sexuality. This is a show for everyone. Well, everyone except children and my 95-year-old [...]

  39. tanya says:

    wow. I Love this. So well put. THANK YOU DAVID. I'm reading it again. And sharing it.

  40. [...] One might even, in the twisted logic of sexual anorexia (laced with puritanical fear), be grateful to have disconnected from such naked intimacy. After all, this man is not my fiancé. He is, in fact, not even a lover. How could I possible give over all my orgasm, all my pleasure, all my treasures to someone I casually know? What if he expects something in return? How dare he try to take more than his fair share! No one violates me! [...]

  41. onesadhaka says:

    Seems sorta creepy and misogynistic to me. Fucking with compassion? Isn't that making love? It seems a bit condescending to women, portraying them as odd creatures, somehow different than us. I wanted to be receptive, but fucking a woman's mind just seems base and crude and frankly…weird. I'd suggest making love is a holy communion at many levels (physical, mental, and spiritual..plus a few more) and not simply (and crudly) …fucking her mind. Ugh. Poor women who had to go through this. I'd gho on more, but see Kate B has a rebuttal up, and we should get a nice voice of reason and counterpoint from her…

  42. Ryan says:

    I think that any article which claims to speak for any broad group, be it gender, sexual orientation, cultural, racial….will always, always, ALWAYS fail at the sin of implying that any diverse group that are bound by a common thread share the same characteristics. Sometimes that is benign. "Black people are bad swimmers." Well, no, not ALL black people are bad swimmers. Some are. Maybe culturally, a high percentage don't learn how to swim, but there are plenty of good african-american swimmers in the world. All men love sex and hate shopping. No, not really. Not at all really.

    You can speak to a generality of comment, that "many" women like this, but not ALL. That's hokum. You could explore these ideas with them, and perhaps these are new ways of thinking of sexual liberation WITH SOME WOMEN. But to say all of anything is something, wants something, is good (or bad) at something is like saying "All oranges are sweet." No, no they really aren't.

  43. Mara says:

    Definitely compelling and provocative. Leaves much to think about…

    It’s 2013. Please, writers dealing with matters of love and relationships, can you PLEASE not employ HETEROSEXIST LANGUAGE?! As a queer woman, the use of the male/female limiting dichotomy is just straight-up disrespectful and exclusionary.

  44. Booster Blake says:

    David,
    I think you skillfully expressed a very nuanced and powerful experience. Well done. I feel personally served by its emphasis on presence and passion. Your focus on the quality of connection and the art of pause, patience, and penetration are beautiful reminders to the lover within me. I would have liked fuller descriptions of ways 5, 6, and 7.

    5. Painfully- I would love to read you describe your inner experience when giving or receiving pain. Describe the teeter-like edge of it, the underlying readiness to adjust or relieve the intensity instantly.

    6. Animalistic- This is such a great place to play! To leap into mythic connection and wild abandon! Offering perhaps a bit more direction here, refine the context with some exhillerating details.

    7. Lovingly- describing the way you feel when you feel connected to your heart. That melty, gooing, oh I just want to hold her forever feeling. How that nourishes you, how you are fed by her surrender.

    Just sayin. But overall, I'm feeling very grateful for the opportunity to share in your mastery. Thank you.

  45. Booster Blake says:

    To All The Women Offended Here:

    Here is a golden opportunity to examine whatever it is that has you feeling triggered over this article. Are you willing to be curious about what's coming up for you? Clearly David adores women. The level of edginess that he describes is only possible when one deeply honors the principles of safety and respect. So since connection is key here, what are we really concerned about ?

  46. Booster Blake says:

    By the comments alone, it’s clear that many women feel inspired, seen, and totally turned on by the article. What is it that makes their experience one of "Yes!" vs. one of "Hell no!"? Maybe look at your relationship to surrender and vulnerability? Maybe your experiences have led you to believe that sex is not a place to feel safe enough to surrender? While those protective measures were likely critical to your survival at some point in your past, how are they serving you today?

    If you’re simply a woman that prefers to top or just doesn’t resonate with the article’s flavor, then I doubt you’re feeling triggered at all and you probably never even took the time to read this comment (much less reply to it).

  47. Karen says:

    I wish people would really READ this…its not about being dominant or submissive….its about connecting with your partner in many different ways…..about know what she needs, when she needs it……about unlocking something primal and instinctual in both of you…..losing yourselves to everything except each other….if you've never felt that kind of a connection with another person, I wholeheartedly beg you to open yourself up to being this kind of vulnerable…..you will experience things and emotions you have never known about before

  48. yooooo says:

    ARE YOU OKAY, YOU ARE SERIOUSLY MESSED UP. LOL. This is the most hilariously pretentious article I've read all year.

  49. betty says:

    Booster: Um, women who are tops don't dig misogyny either.

Leave a Reply