The Madonna/Whore Complex in Men and Women

I am co-authoring this piece with the forum member Reflection after a discussion that she and I had on this subject. We both think that describing our experiences here on the forum and then allowing others to chime with their own experiences, or for discussion, would be beneficial to all involved.

Reflection and I have discussed multiple times with one another our respective experiences with the Madonna/Whore Complex. In my experience, the Madonna/Whore Complex expresses itself in a way that causes me to "split" women into either sexual or non-sexual categories. This splitting is done psychologically, and isn't simply a function of how physically attractive I find a woman to be. The splitting is basically a result of which of my needs I unconsciously expect/want/need this particular woman to fulfill --- either my needs for emotional intimacy or my needs for sexual stimulation. The two, with me, are fairly mutually exclusive, with very little overlap (i.e., even if I am sexually active with someone I "like," that person during sexual activity would be objectified, and I would view myself as an object as well at that time).

For me, the woman who is sorted into the "emotional needs" category, the Madonna, really seems to be viewed as a mother figure more than anything. This is usually someone who I feel comfortable getting close to and starting to open up with, and who I am extremely comfortable around, but who I have a very difficult time sexualizing, so to speak. While I myself do not have a long-term partner at this time, I think that men with this complex have a tendency to find a long-term partner to fulfill their emotional needs, and then feel unsatisfied sexually, often causing them to seek out an objectified sexual partner as well.

Reflection reports that she believes she experiences a similar dynamic in her own psychology. She feels that she splits men into categories similar to the ones I described, where a man may be categorized as a potential provider, someone to take care of her, or a man may be categorized as someone to achieve intimacy with. The difference, she says, lies in the fact that she views the "Whore" in this case to be the man who provides her with both physical AND emotional intimacy, while the "Madonna" in this case is more of a father figure who she feels dependent on for her material needs, but who is not required or expected to provide either emotional intimacy or physical intimacy (and from whom neither is wanted).

I found this distinction to be interesting because, as she and I discussed, the Madonna figure may play a different role for a man with this complex versus for a woman with this complex. A man with this complex seems to rely on the Madonna figure for emotional needs, but not practical needs, perhaps similar to a mother figure, while the woman with this complex relies on the Madonna figure for material and practical needs, but not emotional needs, perhaps more similar to the way a teenage girl views her father. Meanwhile, for the woman with this complex, the Whore is meant to provide all the emotional and physical needs, sort of like a teenage girl with her boyfriend, while for the man with this complex, the Whore is objectified and provides only physical needs, sort of like a teenage guy who serially dates all the girls at school that turn him on, but gets emotionally close to none. In many ways, these sorts of primitive adolescent approaches to physical and emotional intimacy seem to live on in those who harbor the Madonna/Whore Complex as adults (and both Reflection and I are well over 30, though she insists to me that she has plateaued at age 27).

If anyone else would like to share their experiences on this subject, or discuss these issues in general, please view this as an opportunity to do so.

The splitting is basically a result of which of my needs I unconsciously expect/want/need this particular woman to fulfill --- either my needs for emotional intimacy or my needs for sexual stimulation. The two, with me, are fairly mutually exclusive, with very little overlap (i.e., even if I am sexually active with someone I "like," that person during sexual activity would be objectified, and I would view myself as an object as well at that time).

Esquire, thanks for this thread. I have three questions and a short description of why they might be important.

1. What does it mean to "view myself as an object at that time"? I think this is an alien concept to most people who don't experience this, and also if they appreciated it better there is also a chance they would get what it means when the other person objectifies them. I've seen it written that narcissist can view others as a 'thing'. How is that related to what you are talking about here?

2. My experience suggests that a narcissist with BPD traits can flip back and forth in his perception of the other as Madonna and Whore. He doesn't need 2 separate people for that. Perhaps sometimes both perceptions exists at the same time in his head, which would be, I guess, uncomfortable at best. Do you think this is possible?

3. How is the Madonna/Whore complex related (if at all) to idealization/devalue?

Freyja,

You ask very good questions. I will try to address them as best I can.

1. I think the best way for a "Non" to understand objectification is to think of BDSM. That's a very basic example of how two people can mutually objectify each other during sex (in a way that is mutually agreed upon in the case of BDSM, of course). With many forms of BDSM, you have a domme and a sub, with the domme being transformed into a wholly sexual being, and the sub being transformed into a wholly sexual object, at least until the session is complete. I think that's a good example of what it might mean to objectify someone, including yourself. Basically the person is transformed into something that exists for a specific role or purpose (usually to meet another's needs in some way). I agree that this is important to understand from the outside if Nons are truly going to understand this topic.

2. I am not able to flip back and forth between the two once I discover that I have unconsciously "categorized" a woman in either role. I think that someone with BPD or with both NPD and BPD might have a different answer.

3. I actually think that both the Madonna and the Whore can both be initially idealized and subsequently devalued. They are just idealized in different ways, with the Madonna as the goddess (usually feels like a person who understands you in a way that no one else does), and the Whore as someone who exudes sexuality in a near perfect way. So I think both can be put on pedestals and then taken off the pedestal once they fail to meet your needs (which is unfair to them of course, as who decided their job was to meet anyone's needs). Some would argue that the Madonna is idealized and the Whore is only objectified, which may be true, but I'm not so sure.

As a BPD, sexually, I objectify my husband. I, unlike a man, do not have the concern of having and maintaining an erection. I often fantasize about other people and other things when being sexual with him. My eyes are seldom open. It is very mechanical. I get mine. You get yours.

I use to cycle through stages of wanting to be sexual with him versus finding the act with him repulsive.
Since becoming aware, I am more familiar with what is going on inside of me and I no longer want to be sexual with him. I prefer pornography, masturbation and the fantasies of my mind.

I used to believe that our sexual issues were due to his failings in terms of meeting my needs. I would blame him. It was never anything to do with me. I do not kiss. On occasion there is the typical chaste kiss. I seldom afterwards have the need to be held in sexual bliss.

But the thing is that I want and desire all the above with someone. Especially the kissing.

reflection wrote:It is very mechanical.

It is always a pleasure to see you participate, reflection.

I was going to describe it like this to freyja when she asked for an explanation of what it feels like to view the other as an object. It feels very functional, as though we have pressed our genitals together for an express purpose. I feel no closeness, it's as though we are colleagues achieving a professional goal.

I'm going to begin with what I believe to be a relevant quote from an earlier thread of mine entitled The other as ideal maternal figure. I think it's a good description of what the idealization of the other feels like subjectively, and what it's like to harbor sexual and familial emotions and fantasies for the same object, which, as has been said, can happen on occasion.

Ember wrote:Narcissists and others diagnosed with Cluster B disorders are known for their difficulty establishing and maintaining boundaries in relationships. This often results in relationships that contain elements from types of relationships that are usually considered mutually exclusive. In a less general case, I find that many narcissistic and non-narcissistic men alike report difficulty in their relationships because of their experiences interacting with, or direct intervention by, their narcissistic mothers.

I find that this is an element in my relationships: I relate to the female other as parent, be the relationship romantic or otherwise. I sometimes have fantasies about my love interests treating me in a maternal way; I imagine them stroking my hair or giving me affectionate kisses; sometimes they bathe me or I suck on their breasts. I love it when a woman cares for me, and I go absolutely nuts when a woman feeds me. I feel safer nowhere else than with my head in a woman's lap; I love to think about how the origin of life lies just beneath her surface; I love her warmth. To me, a woman's lap is measureless and radiant expanse.

I have never been one to use the Madonna-Whore moniker, but I have considered parental or familial influence in the context of romantic or sexual relationships. I do not think it can be separated from the early experiences with the parent.

I had two alcoholic parents as a child, so they were the models that I had for appropriate interpersonal interaction. Naturally, the boundaries in our relationships were subtly abnormal. The increased aggression taught me false things about myself and relationships. When I saw my parents physically fight one another, I was taught that lover can be enemy. When they lacked the patience to meet my needs, I was taught that I needed too much. When they confided in me things beyond my years, they taught me that others are demanding, that I am uniquely able to meet others' demands, and that I am expected to meet those demands or be held morally responsible. The increased apathy caused other abnormal boundaries. They were alcoholics since my sister and I were born, and it is not so important to dress a young child, and it is not so important to dress when one is drunk; I found that as we grew older, three or four years old and onward perhaps, we still were not often dressed. It was not something that needed to be done at home. Sometimes one or all of us would be naked at the same time. Needless to say, this is very unusual in the United States. I should say that there was no sexual abuse.

I come to the conclusion that while I intellectually understand that romantic and familial relationships are different, I have had no personal experience to internalize that statement emotionally. Relative and lover are aspects of one and the same thing. They can both seek emotional intimacy, they can both be seductive.

I feel an unusual...anxiety (?) right now. I wonder what is that little feeling.

I would be interested to hear about anyone else's early familial relationships and how they believe they have had an influence on later romantic relationships.

This is a very relevant topic to me and it's very difficult to consolidate all of one's thoughts on such a broad topic, so I expect that I will bring up other things as the discussion continues.

Very interesting topic, thank you so much for sharing your thoughts.

Over the years I've come to the conclusion that most people are wired to feel deeply connected to partners who regress them. Regression to me is a strange kind of seduction- it involves triggering unmet childhood needs, together with the promise of meeting them. If you've heard the cliche `she married her father' or `he married his mother' this is the kind of thing I'm referring to.

I believe that when children are deeply wounded, they are highly prone to this kind seduction. Its so powerful because the needs of a child are connected with survival. Therefore the promise of having those needs met is so compelling and urgent, it will keep a partner in a relationship long after it is clear that the partner cannot, in fact, meet those needs. Usually its for the same reasons the parent could not- ie they are too similar to the parent.

I've actually occasionally become very close to men with a Madonna-whore syndrome, sometimes a Gay men who became my best friend, and once in my twenties. He was a man who clung to me and dated me many times a week, but wanted no sexual relationship. I didn't understand the dynamic and ended the relationship, and he was very hurt.

Upon reflection, I expect he felt that including sex in a relationship which met his emotional needs was too risky and could lead to abandonment. Unfortunately, the spit ensured abandonment because it made me feel undesirable to him.

Esquire wrote:
Reflection reports that she believes she experiences a similar dynamic in her own psychology. She feels that she splits men into categories similar to the ones I described, where a man may be categorized as a potential provider, someone to take care of her, or a man may be categorized as someone to achieve intimacy with. The difference, she says, lies in the fact that she views the "Whore" in this case to be the man who provides her with both physical AND emotional intimacy, while the "Madonna" in this case is more of a father figure who she feels dependent on for her material needs, but who is not required or expected to provide either emotional intimacy or physical intimacy (and from whom neither is wanted).

Very interesting topic, guys, and I appreciate your honesty. Sex is one thing that I have a hard time to open about.

There is something here that intrigues me.
In my understanding the healthy relationship is the one that includes both physical an emotional intimacy (not that I am an expert). So what would perhaps constitute a healthy relationship, somehow turns into whore?
Provider and someone who take care of me - this sounds like a father role?

I think perhaps there is the difference in male and female because of the implied mother and father roles that we internalize and bring with us to adult life.

Interesting...being on the receiving end of the split is not much fun...

Hmmm...from my end, and comparing previous r.s. to the last one with my exH Dx BPD/ NPD, and not ever willing to look at his behaviors...previous, were normal , I guess. Sex was not an issue at all. Neither was it objectifying of either party that I am aware of. Not on my end at any rate.

Sex is being completely there in those moments. No other mental distractions at all...just my partner.

This earlier theory is based not on oedipal-based castration anxiety but on man's primary hatred of women, stimulated by the child’s sense that he had been made to experience intolerable frustration and/or narcissistic injury at the hands of his mother. According to this theory, in adulthood the boy-turned-man seeks to avenge these mistreatments through sadistic attacks on women who are stand-ins for mother.
(blame your mom)

In psychoanalytic literature, a Madonna–whore complex is the inability to maintain sexual arousal within a committed, loving relationship.[1] First identified by Sigmund Freud, under the rubric of psychic impotence,[2] this psychological complex is said to develop in men who see women as either saintly Madonnas or debased prostitutes. Men with this complex desire a sexual partner who has been degraded (the whore) while they cannot desire the respected partner (the Madonna).[3] Freud wrote: "Where such men love they have no desire and where they desire they cannot love."[4] Clinical psychologist Uwe Hartmann, writing in 2009, stated that the complex "is still highly prevalent in today's patients".[3]

In sexual politics the view of women as either Madonnas or whores limits women's sexual expression, offering two mutually exclusive ways to construct a sexual identity.[5]

The term is also used popularly, if sometimes with subtly different meanings.

so the cure is seeing your parents have sex