What do you think?
Rate this book
My Secret Garden: Women’s Sexual Fantasies
When it first appeared, Nancy Friday's taboo-shattering bestseller My Secret Garden created a mixed storm of outrage and exhilaration. Those women who feared their erotic fantasies called it pornographic. Those women who read it recognized in its pages the hidden content of their own sexuality.
More outspoken and graphic than any book before its time, My Secret Garden quickly became a classic study of female sexuality. Today, more than one million women hail this astonishing study as a groundbreaking book -- a liberating force adding a new dimension to their sexual fantasies and lives.
442 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1973
2068 people are currently reading
11162 people want to read
About the author
Nancy Friday
21 books212 followersNancy Colbert Friday was an American author who wrote on the topics of female sexuality and liberation. Her writings argue that women have often been reared under an ideal of womanhood, which was outdated and restrictive, and largely unrepresentative of many women's true inner lives, and that openness about women's hidden lives could help free women to truly feel able to enjoy being themselves. She asserts that this is not due to deliberate malice, but due to social expectation, and that for women's and men's benefit alike it is healthier that both be able to be equally open, participatory and free to be accepted for who and what they are.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 313 reviews
May 21, 2008
Filthy, irrational, pointless, and rather badly written, like all of Nancy Friday's books, My Secret Garden offers what pretty much amounts to a guarantee to get me off.
December 2, 2012
This book changed my life. As far as I know it is the first book of it's kind ever written. I picked it up while a senior in college at the University of Mn where I was studying Theatre Arts. My idea was to get some kind of clue to what women secretly think about...
It taught me that all women have sexy little fantasies that they hide from most people, even sometimes from themselves. 25 years after I read it, I began a similar book using her basic categories, or 'types' of flowers in the secret garden. I've read all of her books, but this one is still the best. It's fresh, new, and groundbreaking...Just as it was in 1969...
My belief now, after years of interviews with various women, is that every woman has inside her a bouquet of sexual fantasies that makes her totally unique from other women. No wonder men have such a hard time understanding and categorizing them...you simply can't. You can only experience each one a beautiful and completely unique individual...Just like flowers.
It taught me that all women have sexy little fantasies that they hide from most people, even sometimes from themselves. 25 years after I read it, I began a similar book using her basic categories, or 'types' of flowers in the secret garden. I've read all of her books, but this one is still the best. It's fresh, new, and groundbreaking...Just as it was in 1969...
My belief now, after years of interviews with various women, is that every woman has inside her a bouquet of sexual fantasies that makes her totally unique from other women. No wonder men have such a hard time understanding and categorizing them...you simply can't. You can only experience each one a beautiful and completely unique individual...Just like flowers.
May 6, 2015
Reviewed Feb. 18th, 2013
Like so many older books on sex that purport to have a sociological raison d'etre. In this case, the (at the time) ground-breaking discussion of women's fantasies but in actuality it's just a not-very-well written collection of extremely dirty stories that unless you neither fancy women nor are one, are probably going to get you hot, just as the author intended.
Like so many older books on sex that purport to have a sociological raison d'etre. In this case, the (at the time) ground-breaking discussion of women's fantasies but in actuality it's just a not-very-well written collection of extremely dirty stories that unless you neither fancy women nor are one, are probably going to get you hot, just as the author intended.
February 20, 2013
I read this as a young teen, I think I was either 12 or 13. I got my copy in a thrift store. I was always shopping for books in the thrift store back then. I kept it secret because I'd never read anything so explicit before. I'm giving it 5 stars because it made a big impact on me at that young age.
Want to read
March 11, 2024making a reading list of all pieces referenced in ContraPoints's Twilight analysis vid 🤓
September 29, 2013
One thing I will say for this book is that it can do wonders for a person (me) who feels concerned or disturbed about the things that occur in their fantasy life. Chances are you will feel virginal and innocent after reading some of the darker taboos in this book.
My first problem with this book was not its subject matter ... it was the delivery. I'm not a psychologist so anything stated here is only opinion and experience. That being said, as Mrs. Friday points out ... women's fantasies tend to be extremely complex. The setting/situation is often a means to an end be that the removal of inhibition, control, accountability or the shedding of moral/social/gender constraints. I felt this book did a very poor job of representing what these fantasies meant on a personal level to the person relating them and in that sense there was something akin to exploitation about packaging them as a general representation of women who have any one of the given fantasies shared in the book.
Ultimately, what I cannot abide, is the inclusion of the admission of criminal activity. If this had been a book of male fantasies and a man had confessed to having molested an 11 year old girl and then marrying her 2 years later, this would not be acclaimed as a treatise on male sexuality. That man would be rightly demonized as would the book, author and publisher. Can anyone say double standard? That poor little boy!
My first problem with this book was not its subject matter ... it was the delivery. I'm not a psychologist so anything stated here is only opinion and experience. That being said, as Mrs. Friday points out ... women's fantasies tend to be extremely complex. The setting/situation is often a means to an end be that the removal of inhibition, control, accountability or the shedding of moral/social/gender constraints. I felt this book did a very poor job of representing what these fantasies meant on a personal level to the person relating them and in that sense there was something akin to exploitation about packaging them as a general representation of women who have any one of the given fantasies shared in the book.
Ultimately, what I cannot abide, is the inclusion of the admission of criminal activity. If this had been a book of male fantasies and a man had confessed to having molested an 11 year old girl and then marrying her 2 years later, this would not be acclaimed as a treatise on male sexuality. That man would be rightly demonized as would the book, author and publisher. Can anyone say double standard? That poor little boy!
August 9, 2020
It's a collection of women's sexual fantasies, author collected over the years. Some of them from interviews, the other ones from anonymous letters where women reveal their souls and innermost secrets. If you think you can imagine how that sounds, I would challenge you that you can't. Some of them are from the sphere of usual and ordinary life, because that's where the very material - lego bricks of imagination - comes from (where else), but some... some will knock you out of your shoes. That is, if you wore ones while lying in bed in the middle of night listening to this. If you are, it's ok. What you do in the privacy of your mind or your bedroom is your own thing and it's all ok. As long as shoes consent, that is.
If you're a man, this book is the most direct glimpse into the "mind of the enemy", that "secret garden" you can never approach to because women keep it hidden and remote even from their very selves, due to their goddamn upbringing or even goddamner need to keep the appearances. You need to earn their trust and if you don't fall victim to emotional ebola or bankrupt in the process, there might be real person for you waiting on the other side. But there's no guarantee.
Because, in all likelihood, she's not even aware herself of miracle her mind and body are capable of. And if she is, she's likely caught in mind games thinking she has to be some special, prescribed thing for you to love her, not realizing the only thing she has to do to completely knock you out is stop doing what everybody else is.
Of course, asshole men who say they want one thing (lady in public, whore in bed), but actually act all high, mighty and judgemental when they get woman open to sex in all its beautiful shapes and forms because, in actuality, they just can't keep up with sexual dynamo she is, don't help this situation.
This book might give you some ideas on riches waiting on the other side of the wall and help you decide if you're really ready for them.
If you're a man, this book is the most direct glimpse into the "mind of the enemy", that "secret garden" you can never approach to because women keep it hidden and remote even from their very selves, due to their goddamn upbringing or even goddamner need to keep the appearances. You need to earn their trust and if you don't fall victim to emotional ebola or bankrupt in the process, there might be real person for you waiting on the other side. But there's no guarantee.
Because, in all likelihood, she's not even aware herself of miracle her mind and body are capable of. And if she is, she's likely caught in mind games thinking she has to be some special, prescribed thing for you to love her, not realizing the only thing she has to do to completely knock you out is stop doing what everybody else is.
Of course, asshole men who say they want one thing (lady in public, whore in bed), but actually act all high, mighty and judgemental when they get woman open to sex in all its beautiful shapes and forms because, in actuality, they just can't keep up with sexual dynamo she is, don't help this situation.
This book might give you some ideas on riches waiting on the other side of the wall and help you decide if you're really ready for them.
August 9, 2012
Delicious. Back in the seventies this book proved that women were naughty, dirty and utterly erotic. Anyone sitting at home ashamed of their fantasies now should pick this gem up and be liberated. No matter how obscene your fantasies are Nancy Friday is here to show you not only that you are not alone but that you're not even really trying.
There is one sad addendum - if you read later books by Firday you'll find that with the rise of porn, the internet and a general openness in society about about sex the originality and bizarre nature of the fantasies declines. With freedom, it seems, comes uniformity.
There is one sad addendum - if you read later books by Firday you'll find that with the rise of porn, the internet and a general openness in society about about sex the originality and bizarre nature of the fantasies declines. With freedom, it seems, comes uniformity.
June 22, 2010
NOT for the faint-hearted about sexuality. I was not only surprised, but pretty deeply shocked at some of the fantasies women told for this book. I learned that I am still pretty much a prude AND that my own fantasies are more emotionally and romantic based, than having to do with pure sexuality.
Part of me wishes I had not read this book, but part of me is glad that it helped me learn a few things about myself and my morals and boundaries.
Part of me wishes I had not read this book, but part of me is glad that it helped me learn a few things about myself and my morals and boundaries.
March 31, 2022
I just could not get through this book. I started My Secret Garden in December 2021, meaning this has taken me 3 months to get through.
I became aware of My Secret Garden through a book titled Pleasures: Women Write Erotica. Pleasures was released 11 years after My Secret Garden and is a total rip off of it, but it's 10 times better. Pleasures follows the exact same lay out of My Secret Garden, but what separates these two books is the writing. The women who contributed to Pleasures were WRITERS whom the author knew and approached to be included in the book. The women who contributed to My Secret Garden are random women across the country (and Britain) who decided to send in their contributions for the book. I'm glad these women conquered their anxieties and expressed their sexual fantasies, but, Jesus Christ, they suck at writing.
And frankly, I wasn't impressed with Nancy Friday's writing either. At the beginning of each chapter or section she offers her own insight, analysis, or explanation of the upcoming writings. When reading these, I often found myself thinking, "What the hell is she on about?" The goal of this book was to remove the stigma around women's sexual fantasies and desires, and I think that's a great goal. But let's address the elephant in the room here... this book was released during Second Wave Feminism. There are definitely sections that I don't believe fly today. In my criticisms of this book I don't want to come across as shaming any of the fantasies expressed. My goal for this review is not to be the thought police. But I don't think some of the sections are appropriate to be compiled, published, and shared.
For example, there is a section that I did take particular issue with. The section titled "ROOM NUMBER TWELVE: BIG BLACK MEN" that is definitely very fetishy. Nancy Friday starts the section with, "All black people are promiscuous... white people think. They're always fucking or they're about to. They reek of sexuality." And I can't find the exact page, but there's a line that talks about how part of the turn on is the "forbidden-ness" of having sex with a Black man, how it would piss off your mother if she found out. This is incredibly problematic writing to use when describing the sexualities of Black men. The hyper-sexualization of both Black men and women is a product of both systemic and individualized racism, and this issue is still perpetuated today. The idea that Black men are inherently "sexual" "forbidden" and "promiscuous" strips them of humanity and respect. Black men are not sexual objects you fuck to piss off your mom. They're human beings, not tools in your White woman revenge plot.
And then there are sections like, "ROOM NUMBER TEN: INCEST" and "ROOM NUMBER ELEVEN: THE ZOO". I don't think I'm equipped to handle the feminist analysis of these sections, but I do have some thoughts. I don't really want to dig my nails into women that fantasized about incest or bestiality. I understand if you want to, but I'm just not interested in my review coming off this way. However, I do question the decision to compile sections of these fantasies and publish them. One could argue that it normalizes these behaviors. And many of the women who write about these fantasies have acted them out. More than a handful of the women in this book have participated in bestiality. To be very clear, this is illegal and HIGHLY unethical. And the incest chapter is just sad. It's mostly women writing about times their family members sexually assaulted them and they now think back to these moments when they fantasize. I am DEFINITELY not equipped to discuss the psychological aspects of these fantasies, but I do question Nancy Friday's decision to create a chapter that is clearly heavily built upon women's assaults.
Now, you could argue "Well, if the goal of this book is to remove the stigma of women's experiences, then including these traumatic events removes stigma from sexual assault." I disagree. Nancy Friday repeatedly refers to the work she put into compiling these writings as "research." That's fine, I have no problem with her using that word. However, I don't believe anyone is reading this book for "research." This is clearly an erotica, and people are clearly reading it to get off on it. Compiling a section that is heavily built upon women's real experiences with sexual assault in an erotica just doesn't sit right with me.
I respect the ultimate goal here. I think it's great that Nancy Friday wanted to discuss women's sexualities during a time when marital rape wasn't outlawed in all 50 states and women couldn't own a credit card in their own name. However, many parts of this book just didn't age well. And I hate seeing it on those "Greatest Feminist Eroticas" lists. You know the ones I'm talking about.
Just read Pleasures instead. Trust me, it's way better.
I will now leave you with my favorite line of My Secret Garden: "I rather like this and wouldn't really mind being treated like a whore... an expensive one."
I became aware of My Secret Garden through a book titled Pleasures: Women Write Erotica. Pleasures was released 11 years after My Secret Garden and is a total rip off of it, but it's 10 times better. Pleasures follows the exact same lay out of My Secret Garden, but what separates these two books is the writing. The women who contributed to Pleasures were WRITERS whom the author knew and approached to be included in the book. The women who contributed to My Secret Garden are random women across the country (and Britain) who decided to send in their contributions for the book. I'm glad these women conquered their anxieties and expressed their sexual fantasies, but, Jesus Christ, they suck at writing.
And frankly, I wasn't impressed with Nancy Friday's writing either. At the beginning of each chapter or section she offers her own insight, analysis, or explanation of the upcoming writings. When reading these, I often found myself thinking, "What the hell is she on about?" The goal of this book was to remove the stigma around women's sexual fantasies and desires, and I think that's a great goal. But let's address the elephant in the room here... this book was released during Second Wave Feminism. There are definitely sections that I don't believe fly today. In my criticisms of this book I don't want to come across as shaming any of the fantasies expressed. My goal for this review is not to be the thought police. But I don't think some of the sections are appropriate to be compiled, published, and shared.
For example, there is a section that I did take particular issue with. The section titled "ROOM NUMBER TWELVE: BIG BLACK MEN" that is definitely very fetishy. Nancy Friday starts the section with, "All black people are promiscuous... white people think. They're always fucking or they're about to. They reek of sexuality." And I can't find the exact page, but there's a line that talks about how part of the turn on is the "forbidden-ness" of having sex with a Black man, how it would piss off your mother if she found out. This is incredibly problematic writing to use when describing the sexualities of Black men. The hyper-sexualization of both Black men and women is a product of both systemic and individualized racism, and this issue is still perpetuated today. The idea that Black men are inherently "sexual" "forbidden" and "promiscuous" strips them of humanity and respect. Black men are not sexual objects you fuck to piss off your mom. They're human beings, not tools in your White woman revenge plot.
And then there are sections like, "ROOM NUMBER TEN: INCEST" and "ROOM NUMBER ELEVEN: THE ZOO". I don't think I'm equipped to handle the feminist analysis of these sections, but I do have some thoughts. I don't really want to dig my nails into women that fantasized about incest or bestiality. I understand if you want to, but I'm just not interested in my review coming off this way. However, I do question the decision to compile sections of these fantasies and publish them. One could argue that it normalizes these behaviors. And many of the women who write about these fantasies have acted them out. More than a handful of the women in this book have participated in bestiality. To be very clear, this is illegal and HIGHLY unethical. And the incest chapter is just sad. It's mostly women writing about times their family members sexually assaulted them and they now think back to these moments when they fantasize. I am DEFINITELY not equipped to discuss the psychological aspects of these fantasies, but I do question Nancy Friday's decision to create a chapter that is clearly heavily built upon women's assaults.
Now, you could argue "Well, if the goal of this book is to remove the stigma of women's experiences, then including these traumatic events removes stigma from sexual assault." I disagree. Nancy Friday repeatedly refers to the work she put into compiling these writings as "research." That's fine, I have no problem with her using that word. However, I don't believe anyone is reading this book for "research." This is clearly an erotica, and people are clearly reading it to get off on it. Compiling a section that is heavily built upon women's real experiences with sexual assault in an erotica just doesn't sit right with me.
I respect the ultimate goal here. I think it's great that Nancy Friday wanted to discuss women's sexualities during a time when marital rape wasn't outlawed in all 50 states and women couldn't own a credit card in their own name. However, many parts of this book just didn't age well. And I hate seeing it on those "Greatest Feminist Eroticas" lists. You know the ones I'm talking about.
Just read Pleasures instead. Trust me, it's way better.
I will now leave you with my favorite line of My Secret Garden: "I rather like this and wouldn't really mind being treated like a whore... an expensive one."
April 20, 2013
Could a collection of women's sexual fantasies from the 70s still shock a reader in the Fifty Shades era?
It sure can.
Though it's easy to become desensitised after the first 100 or so pages of orgies, horses, dogs, whips and big black men.
But telling those fantasies off as silly or deviant is exactly what this book goes in against.Your fantasies are your own, and while you risk scorn when sharing them with the world, and may experience a feeling of guilt as a consequence, ultimately it doesn't matter if it makes you feel good.
What most surprised me about this book, other than the level of openness of these 70s women, other than the large apparent attraction of Alsatians (I learned a word!), and other than the large number of women already married with children and in a not-so-happy marriage by the time they're 22... was how touching some of these fantasies were.
(No, not that kind of touching.)
A lot of these fantasies seem to reflect a great yearning these women feel for tenderness and love. Many fantasies describe not sexual acts, but situations in which the woman is admired, told she's worth looking at and caring for. Some women just fantasise about walks on the beach. Other contributions that touched me in a way:
- The woman, who was most definitely not a lesbian, but who often fantasised about being with a woman, and who often had sexual encounters with a lesbian friend of hers, which made me feel for that friend.
- The man who wrote in to tell that his wife had no fantasies whatsoever thank you very much, and signed the letter in her name.
- The woman who had been sexually abused in her childhood by a member of the school staff, and grew up to be a member of a school staff herself, and now abused her pupils in the same way. A sad vicious cycle.
- The man who wrote in to share the fantasy of his now late wife, who confessed to him about fantasising about a certain actor. During sex they then acted out that fantasy, and the day after he went to buy an outfit reminiscent of that actor. This made his wife cry, as she had been afraid he actually wouldn't be able to look him in the eye anymore after the previous night.
Singling out these fantasies probably says something about me in return, but I'll leave it at that.
In short, this is a good bedside-table book, or train book, if you're not too much of a blusher.
It sure can.
Though it's easy to become desensitised after the first 100 or so pages of orgies, horses, dogs, whips and big black men.
But telling those fantasies off as silly or deviant is exactly what this book goes in against.Your fantasies are your own, and while you risk scorn when sharing them with the world, and may experience a feeling of guilt as a consequence, ultimately it doesn't matter if it makes you feel good.
What most surprised me about this book, other than the level of openness of these 70s women, other than the large apparent attraction of Alsatians (I learned a word!), and other than the large number of women already married with children and in a not-so-happy marriage by the time they're 22... was how touching some of these fantasies were.
(No, not that kind of touching.)
A lot of these fantasies seem to reflect a great yearning these women feel for tenderness and love. Many fantasies describe not sexual acts, but situations in which the woman is admired, told she's worth looking at and caring for. Some women just fantasise about walks on the beach. Other contributions that touched me in a way:
- The woman, who was most definitely not a lesbian, but who often fantasised about being with a woman, and who often had sexual encounters with a lesbian friend of hers, which made me feel for that friend.
- The man who wrote in to tell that his wife had no fantasies whatsoever thank you very much, and signed the letter in her name.
- The woman who had been sexually abused in her childhood by a member of the school staff, and grew up to be a member of a school staff herself, and now abused her pupils in the same way. A sad vicious cycle.
- The man who wrote in to share the fantasy of his now late wife, who confessed to him about fantasising about a certain actor. During sex they then acted out that fantasy, and the day after he went to buy an outfit reminiscent of that actor. This made his wife cry, as she had been afraid he actually wouldn't be able to look him in the eye anymore after the previous night.
Singling out these fantasies probably says something about me in return, but I'll leave it at that.
In short, this is a good bedside-table book, or train book, if you're not too much of a blusher.
July 3, 2011
Nancy Friday's books are so refreshing to me. The first one I read was this one- MY SECRET GARDEN. The "garden" in question has nothing to do with soil and plants. This is the first book of women's sexual fantasies collected by Nancy Friday starting in the 1970's. She was not a psychologist or social scientist. She was a woman who wanted other women in a world that was finally opening up to female sexuality to be free to anonymously unveil their deepest sexual fantasies for other women to enjoy and be inspired by. The women and girls, using first names only, described their sexual history and went on to share, quite graphically, their fantasies.
In the early 1970's, the feminist movement was cranking up in earnest and the pill had finally become available more freely to women who were not married. There was much more freedom for women and this book caught the spirit of that. For those who would like to be refreshed by the fantasies and lives of real women telling their real stories rather than porn and semi porn published by men showing what they think our fantasies are or should be, check out all of Nancy Friday's books. Enjoy!
In the early 1970's, the feminist movement was cranking up in earnest and the pill had finally become available more freely to women who were not married. There was much more freedom for women and this book caught the spirit of that. For those who would like to be refreshed by the fantasies and lives of real women telling their real stories rather than porn and semi porn published by men showing what they think our fantasies are or should be, check out all of Nancy Friday's books. Enjoy!
June 7, 2017
And before internet porn and Shades of Grey there was one clever lady who collected other people's fantasies and packaged them neatly into a book with only the bare minimum of pseudo-intellectual, psycho babble around it as was required to make it past censorship - and hey presto a multimillion dollar book was born. I still take my hat off to Mrs Friday for letting others do the work but also thank her for the copy that existed in my parents' house and that introduced me to fantasising beyond meeting the object of my desire in the first place...although, personally, I could have done without the incest and the bestiality. Tongue in cheek aside: an important book in the liberation of women that deserves its status.
November 12, 2011
Great book. It makes you feel like less of a weirdo for your own fantasies lol. And if you're an aspiring erotica writer its a great source of inspiration. Didn't really enjoy her interjections but I just skimmed over them.
Definitely worth the read.
Definitely worth the read.
January 29, 2010
This book made me feel so NOT like a freak. It was nice to know other women were fantasizing, too.
January 29, 2021
I only read the fantasies, skipped the pseudo science and analysis.
June 16, 2021
This is a pretty cool collection of women’s sexual fantasies. It hasn't been done before. Haven’t been repeated, although I wish it would.
The collection of fantasies are great, and nicely organized and contextualized. Some are arousing, some are weird and others just made me laugh. On the other hand, despite that Friday is a smart, brave lady with nice writing skills, her social and ethical commentary was not all very impressive. My issue with her commentary is that she's embedded in a system of thought that only takes “nurture” into consideration to explain human behavior, neglecting “nature”, and that sexual freedom is an ultimate good with no consequences.
The book was intended for women, but as a man, I found it valuable to read regardless. The book gives a nice overview of the range of women’s sexuality and made me more reflect on how much fantasy plays a role in sex. And although I may sound criticalof the book in general, but I do think the book does a lot of good things, bring up many sexual ideas to play with ... encourages partners to talk about fantasies, etc...
The book gave me the inspiration to write my own fantasies down. It’s interesting to note that sexual fantasies thrive in a dimly lit room of the psyche, lit by romantic candles.
When I wrote my fantasies down on my computer to be analyzed, they were transported from the dimly lit room into a squeaky clean lab with bright fluorescent light, sterilizing the erotic intensity, as they no longer come to me and take hold of me, at least for the time being. I suspect some of the power of fantasy comes from the ambiguity of how you feel about them.
From what I know of women’s actual sexuality (hardly anything), it seems to me that the selected fantasies are well-chosen. But I speculate that most of them occupy the outer-edges of fantasy, tilted toward the extreme, and do not seem to represent the general population. I suppose the hyper-sexual portrayal of women didn’t hurt Friday’s intention with the book, namely to encourage women to talk about their relatively mild fantasies.
At the end of the book, there was a Ph.D. guy defending Friday, and discarded this critique of “Not representative” with muddling any rhyme or reason behind intellectual babble. He attempts to invalidate the critique by saying “It’s impossible to get a representative sampling of any study of anything.” The problem with this defense, of course, is that this defense can be used for any study of anything.
This is not a critique by the way. From a man’s point of view, the palette of the extremes can paint an accurate picture of women’s overall sexuality. And might also compensate that a lot of people think of women as creatures of pure sunshine - farting fairy dust smelling flowers in their free time.
Friday insists that fantasy is harmless, and there’s nothing that can go wrong with it, regardless of its content. She argues: “If it results in a good fuck, then what’s the harm?” This depth of thinking is limited to the idea that sex is merely a physical act, where the whole point of sex is a physical pleasure and cumming.
The issue is that when you fantasize about someone else during sex (which, by the way, is advocated in the book), you’re reducing your partner to a masturbation toy. When both partners are doing this, sex is reduced to two pieces of meat rubbing against each other while their minds completely detached, off to their respective fantasy-land, pretending that something else is happening.
Freud and Jung would disagree with Friday that fantasy is harmless, because fantasy may increase neuroticism: Especially if the fantasy is outside the sphere of moral defensibility.
Repeating a fantasy over and over that cannot and should not be acted upon results in neuroticism. The fantasy will begin to take on a life on its own, conscious or unconscious. This will happen regardless of whether or not you admit to yourself that you want this to happen in reality. The fantasy can grow into an independent self-sustaining personality of a mind, and this will result in a growing unconscious inner conflict.
I believe this is true because I have found that repeating a thought that’s possible in reality has slowly tended to become reality. This is not necessarily “Law of attraction”, but just basic neurological reprogramming, plastic neurons firing together ‘n’ shit. Fantasy is not limited a source of joy and a better fuck, encapsulated and sealed tight from any real-life consequences, as Friday would say, but it has a deeper function, maybe one of the main drivers of human behavior.
On the other side, fantasy can have the opposite effect, an escape from reality, to stagnate real change. Martin Shepard suggests women continue their fantasies to compensate for any lack in reality, in fear that if they stopped, their real-life situation may become worse as they are robbed of their joy. To which I would respond: YES! And that’s exactly the point. Pain is extremely motivating. The more you have to endure the pain of confronting real life, the more likely you are to change the circumstances of your life to the degree you can.
The statement “The fantasy turns me on, but I never want it to happen in reality” is taken from a too simple approach to psychology. It does not take into account that the psyche is made out of many different wishes and personalities. And this part of you may shrink or grow depending on how you diverge your psychic energy.
There were some wild fantasies in the book. I think it’s good that these women admitted these to themselves and accepted them enough to use them for pleasure. Having said that, I doubt a repeated use of a degenerate fantasy gives the person joy in the long term and seems like a mere coping mechanism.
Friday includes a “success story” where there was a correspondence between a married woman and a psychologist. The psychologist suggests the woman to fantasize about a tennis star whom she has a crush on while having sex with her husband. “Don’t tell your husband,” the wise-moral sage of a psychologist said, because: “He will get mad.” The story is presented as a “success” because the fantasy resulted in greater sexual intensity on the following night.
I wish this was satire because this is comically bad advice. This is like suggesting adultery. Sure, the intensity may have been increased that night, and quite possibly the next night also. Problem is, orgasms are, unfortunately, not a good moral compass.
This advice is not beneficial long-term, for the marriage nor the sex life. Any action that you cannot own up to those you love, will eventually yield the situation where a lie has to be produced (verbal or otherwise), which disconnects you from the other, resulting in a less authentic relationship and less mutual trust. Lying and keeping secrets limits the emotional connection you can have with each other, reduces the natural spontaneity you allow, which in turn limits the quality of the sex.
If your conscience doesn’t bother you when you reduce a person who’s sharing their body with you to a masturbation toy, by pretending they are someone else, then that’s a sign of moral immaturity.
Unfortunately, a lot of people are stuck in bad marriages and use fantasy as a coping mechanism. Plenty of women in the book held back discussing their fantasies “to save the husband’s pride,” not realizing that adults are tougher than you think. I don’t know what’s worse, the lack of respect for their partner, or that it’s just a rationalization of the fact they’re the ones too afraid to be rejected. It’s much more flattering to think of oneself as a protector rather than a coward.
Fantasy can be a great source of pleasure and fun, it has a vital place in a healthy sexual relationship, but I don’t share Friday’s enthusiasm for embracing perversion and the short-sighted idea of sex. For the sexual liberation of women, the ideal should be to alleviate the unnecessary repression, and stop there, a radical acceptance of anything goes, sky’s-the-limit and an orgasm-driven hedonistic decadence is going way too far and will make women confused, not fulfilled. (Playing a grumpy old grandpa is a lot of fun you guys, I especially like the part where I get to smack naughty women with big words I just learned.)
I’m amused by the feminist joke that women should have to be promiscuous (sorry for the outdated language) in order to “understand themselves better.” Motherhood will teach you nothing, just compliance. They say: The true path of self-knowledge is found on the cock carousel.
Isn’t it strange how women who have had the time to understand themselves better, have a higher chance of divorce? Even if you take into account that religious women tend to have fewer sexual partners and how religious communities view divorce as more consequential, I would still have guessed that women who had the liberty to test all the types of men, would end up having a higher chance of a successful marriage.
I’m saddened by the fact that girls are encouraged to have sex early, and many girls feel disgusted after losing their virginity from casual sex, (and nausea from the hangover is a factor, too) but she’s encouraged to keep going as she’s promised that she will become numb to the disgust.
Enough hypocrisy on my part. Back to the fantasies.
The key themes in the fantasies I picked up on are: Spontaneous, uncontrolled, force, rape, virile strong men, unknown anonymous men, socially taboo, in public, secret, gangbang, being highly desired (hence the uncontrolled aspect), pain, orgies, love, man-on-man, being dominated, other women and animals (especially dogs) and people watching her during the action.
I was impressed by some fantasies that required flexible mental gymnastics to pull off. Scenes where the identities of the sexual actors were fluid and morphed into and out of different bodies, where the laws of physics were bent, time was warped and the galaxy melted into an orgiastic soup of sensation.
Some women had simpler fantasies - a scene of her standing naked on the beach was enough to get her off.
Some have sweet fantasies, literally, a slow-mo scene running to embrace her lover in a meadow full of flowers, puppies, unicorns, and love. But the vast majority of fantasies were in the opposite direction.
To Friday’s credit, I was surprised by the selection of fantasies, some that I would never imagine someone who considers themselves a feminist would publish. I can only imagine the backlash from the feministic community. Having said that, Friday's acceptance is somewhat superficial, namely, women’s desires have been manufactured by the patriarchy, and women ought to be re-educated to desire more empowering things. Because according to Friday, desire is something we’re taught, not something innate.
For me, this was the most interesting question that popped out of the book: Have Women’s, (and men’s for that matter) sexual desires been manufactured by society, or is it something innate? I think it’s a combination of both. The root desires cannot be changed, but how they manifest in fantasy is influenced by upbringing and society.
A common theme in the fantasies is to be dominated. Friday says that this particular generation of women have their sexuality undefined culturally, and so they default on submissiveness.
But why? It’s not obvious at all why that if you “leave women’s sexuality undefined” they will commonly fantasize about being dominated. Friday thinks this a bad thing and says it requires it will take a generation of educating women to take a more active role in sex and live up to their true sexual potential. In other words, she believes that women ought to be socially conditioned so that their sexual desires will be more empowering.
The implication of this is that: If Friday is wrong and instead, a person has an ingrained nature based on their gender, that would mean Friday does not accept women as they are.
The psyche compensates for unfulfilled desires. And so I would assume that domination/rape-fantasies among women in Western countries are more prevalent than with women in countries where real rape and domestic abuse are more prevalent. (I might be wrong - considering how one woman fantasized about her actual rape.) Whether or not that’s the case, the root desire of these compensations has to come from somewhere, and it is quite clear from my point of view that the basis of these desires is universal and biological.
Nathalie from the “Room 5” chapter says in the postscript of her letter that the more socially liberated and the more of a dominating position she takes on in her work, the more she fantasizes about spanking and bondage. Take this broader, and you will see how Fifty Shades of Grey is a bestseller in an age of feminism.
Friday thinks that women’s domination fantasies stem from shame from society, so when they are forced, they feel unburdened by this feeling. This may play a part in it, but I think there’s a myriad of more important reasons. #1), a dangerous and unexpected event produces adrenaline, pumps up the heart rate, which is closely connected with sexual arousal. #1.5) A sense of urgency helps orgasm come quicker #2) They cannot help but feel highly desired by a determined man, risking his freedom just to have her once. #3) It seems clear from a biological perspective that women who preferred dominant men would have a higher chance of survival. Our core desires are of nature and immutable, and women’s desire for domination is unsatisfied by today's political climate, which grows stronger in fantasy.
Friday claims that as a result of the ages of the patriarchy, sexuality has been owned and defined by men, but now it’s time for women to rise up and claim their sexuality back. I think this notion is fine, only if you neglect minor details like the entire history of mankind and their mythology, where it is the rule that the gods of sexuality were women.
She seems to be misinformed about how women’s sexuality is repressed in comparison to men’s. Men are far more restrictive than women about telling their fantasies and limit their sexual experience to the most necessary details. Men would love to talk about their sexual conquests, but are not taking any risks of turning each other on with the details. A straight man’s worst nightmare would be to share an erection with another. Friday notes that women do not have the same “locker room” talk as men do, but I doubt it’s any sexual oppression, rather, it probably has to do with the way women and men select sexual partners. I don’t see any billboard advertisements, education plans, or religious teachings promoting this strongly ingrained behavior. Because of its universality between different cultures, it’s reasonable to assume this is because of biological differences between the sexes.
My issue with feminists are with those who want to “educate” women rather than accept them and love them for what they are. They reject the natural being of women because they think the patriarchal culture has corrupted them, in other words, (if they happen to be wrong) they believe women of their natural state corrupt.
I get that I sound like the conservative using nature as an excuse to keep things the same, “look, it’s just good ‘ol mother nature, leave her be!” - and I might be wrong, as I am often, but what worries me about certain types of feminists is that they are more obsessed with ideology than they are of women’s well being.
Sexual repression has caused ungodly amounts of suffering, especially for women, which the sexual liberation movement has worked to alleviate, and Friday focuses on a lot. In addition, the new technology of contraception and antibiotics has apparently made sexual repression a need of the past, and books like these help to update our software in accordance with the new hardware.
On the flip side, surveys show that women’s sense of happiness in the United States has decreased since the 1960s. It seems to me that when you make people live incongruent with their nature, their well-being decreases.
You would expect clear proof of the opposite, namely that women’s happiness has increased by their sexual liberation and the variety of partners that are socially acceptable to have. Nancy Friday would probably say something like “Women haven’t had the time to adjust” or “We just need a couple more generations before the poisonous ideas become weeded out.” Yeah, but how many generations? For how long? A theory needs a condition for failure, otherwise, it’s just a blind ideology.
The collection of fantasies are great, and nicely organized and contextualized. Some are arousing, some are weird and others just made me laugh. On the other hand, despite that Friday is a smart, brave lady with nice writing skills, her social and ethical commentary was not all very impressive. My issue with her commentary is that she's embedded in a system of thought that only takes “nurture” into consideration to explain human behavior, neglecting “nature”, and that sexual freedom is an ultimate good with no consequences.
The book was intended for women, but as a man, I found it valuable to read regardless. The book gives a nice overview of the range of women’s sexuality and made me more reflect on how much fantasy plays a role in sex. And although I may sound criticalof the book in general, but I do think the book does a lot of good things, bring up many sexual ideas to play with ... encourages partners to talk about fantasies, etc...
The book gave me the inspiration to write my own fantasies down. It’s interesting to note that sexual fantasies thrive in a dimly lit room of the psyche, lit by romantic candles.
When I wrote my fantasies down on my computer to be analyzed, they were transported from the dimly lit room into a squeaky clean lab with bright fluorescent light, sterilizing the erotic intensity, as they no longer come to me and take hold of me, at least for the time being. I suspect some of the power of fantasy comes from the ambiguity of how you feel about them.
From what I know of women’s actual sexuality (hardly anything), it seems to me that the selected fantasies are well-chosen. But I speculate that most of them occupy the outer-edges of fantasy, tilted toward the extreme, and do not seem to represent the general population. I suppose the hyper-sexual portrayal of women didn’t hurt Friday’s intention with the book, namely to encourage women to talk about their relatively mild fantasies.
At the end of the book, there was a Ph.D. guy defending Friday, and discarded this critique of “Not representative” with muddling any rhyme or reason behind intellectual babble. He attempts to invalidate the critique by saying “It’s impossible to get a representative sampling of any study of anything.” The problem with this defense, of course, is that this defense can be used for any study of anything.
This is not a critique by the way. From a man’s point of view, the palette of the extremes can paint an accurate picture of women’s overall sexuality. And might also compensate that a lot of people think of women as creatures of pure sunshine - farting fairy dust smelling flowers in their free time.
Friday insists that fantasy is harmless, and there’s nothing that can go wrong with it, regardless of its content. She argues: “If it results in a good fuck, then what’s the harm?” This depth of thinking is limited to the idea that sex is merely a physical act, where the whole point of sex is a physical pleasure and cumming.
The issue is that when you fantasize about someone else during sex (which, by the way, is advocated in the book), you’re reducing your partner to a masturbation toy. When both partners are doing this, sex is reduced to two pieces of meat rubbing against each other while their minds completely detached, off to their respective fantasy-land, pretending that something else is happening.
Freud and Jung would disagree with Friday that fantasy is harmless, because fantasy may increase neuroticism: Especially if the fantasy is outside the sphere of moral defensibility.
Repeating a fantasy over and over that cannot and should not be acted upon results in neuroticism. The fantasy will begin to take on a life on its own, conscious or unconscious. This will happen regardless of whether or not you admit to yourself that you want this to happen in reality. The fantasy can grow into an independent self-sustaining personality of a mind, and this will result in a growing unconscious inner conflict.
I believe this is true because I have found that repeating a thought that’s possible in reality has slowly tended to become reality. This is not necessarily “Law of attraction”, but just basic neurological reprogramming, plastic neurons firing together ‘n’ shit. Fantasy is not limited a source of joy and a better fuck, encapsulated and sealed tight from any real-life consequences, as Friday would say, but it has a deeper function, maybe one of the main drivers of human behavior.
On the other side, fantasy can have the opposite effect, an escape from reality, to stagnate real change. Martin Shepard suggests women continue their fantasies to compensate for any lack in reality, in fear that if they stopped, their real-life situation may become worse as they are robbed of their joy. To which I would respond: YES! And that’s exactly the point. Pain is extremely motivating. The more you have to endure the pain of confronting real life, the more likely you are to change the circumstances of your life to the degree you can.
The statement “The fantasy turns me on, but I never want it to happen in reality” is taken from a too simple approach to psychology. It does not take into account that the psyche is made out of many different wishes and personalities. And this part of you may shrink or grow depending on how you diverge your psychic energy.
There were some wild fantasies in the book. I think it’s good that these women admitted these to themselves and accepted them enough to use them for pleasure. Having said that, I doubt a repeated use of a degenerate fantasy gives the person joy in the long term and seems like a mere coping mechanism.
Friday includes a “success story” where there was a correspondence between a married woman and a psychologist. The psychologist suggests the woman to fantasize about a tennis star whom she has a crush on while having sex with her husband. “Don’t tell your husband,” the wise-moral sage of a psychologist said, because: “He will get mad.” The story is presented as a “success” because the fantasy resulted in greater sexual intensity on the following night.
I wish this was satire because this is comically bad advice. This is like suggesting adultery. Sure, the intensity may have been increased that night, and quite possibly the next night also. Problem is, orgasms are, unfortunately, not a good moral compass.
This advice is not beneficial long-term, for the marriage nor the sex life. Any action that you cannot own up to those you love, will eventually yield the situation where a lie has to be produced (verbal or otherwise), which disconnects you from the other, resulting in a less authentic relationship and less mutual trust. Lying and keeping secrets limits the emotional connection you can have with each other, reduces the natural spontaneity you allow, which in turn limits the quality of the sex.
If your conscience doesn’t bother you when you reduce a person who’s sharing their body with you to a masturbation toy, by pretending they are someone else, then that’s a sign of moral immaturity.
Unfortunately, a lot of people are stuck in bad marriages and use fantasy as a coping mechanism. Plenty of women in the book held back discussing their fantasies “to save the husband’s pride,” not realizing that adults are tougher than you think. I don’t know what’s worse, the lack of respect for their partner, or that it’s just a rationalization of the fact they’re the ones too afraid to be rejected. It’s much more flattering to think of oneself as a protector rather than a coward.
Fantasy can be a great source of pleasure and fun, it has a vital place in a healthy sexual relationship, but I don’t share Friday’s enthusiasm for embracing perversion and the short-sighted idea of sex. For the sexual liberation of women, the ideal should be to alleviate the unnecessary repression, and stop there, a radical acceptance of anything goes, sky’s-the-limit and an orgasm-driven hedonistic decadence is going way too far and will make women confused, not fulfilled. (Playing a grumpy old grandpa is a lot of fun you guys, I especially like the part where I get to smack naughty women with big words I just learned.)
I’m amused by the feminist joke that women should have to be promiscuous (sorry for the outdated language) in order to “understand themselves better.” Motherhood will teach you nothing, just compliance. They say: The true path of self-knowledge is found on the cock carousel.
Isn’t it strange how women who have had the time to understand themselves better, have a higher chance of divorce? Even if you take into account that religious women tend to have fewer sexual partners and how religious communities view divorce as more consequential, I would still have guessed that women who had the liberty to test all the types of men, would end up having a higher chance of a successful marriage.
I’m saddened by the fact that girls are encouraged to have sex early, and many girls feel disgusted after losing their virginity from casual sex, (and nausea from the hangover is a factor, too) but she’s encouraged to keep going as she’s promised that she will become numb to the disgust.
Enough hypocrisy on my part. Back to the fantasies.
The key themes in the fantasies I picked up on are: Spontaneous, uncontrolled, force, rape, virile strong men, unknown anonymous men, socially taboo, in public, secret, gangbang, being highly desired (hence the uncontrolled aspect), pain, orgies, love, man-on-man, being dominated, other women and animals (especially dogs) and people watching her during the action.
I was impressed by some fantasies that required flexible mental gymnastics to pull off. Scenes where the identities of the sexual actors were fluid and morphed into and out of different bodies, where the laws of physics were bent, time was warped and the galaxy melted into an orgiastic soup of sensation.
Some women had simpler fantasies - a scene of her standing naked on the beach was enough to get her off.
Some have sweet fantasies, literally, a slow-mo scene running to embrace her lover in a meadow full of flowers, puppies, unicorns, and love. But the vast majority of fantasies were in the opposite direction.
To Friday’s credit, I was surprised by the selection of fantasies, some that I would never imagine someone who considers themselves a feminist would publish. I can only imagine the backlash from the feministic community. Having said that, Friday's acceptance is somewhat superficial, namely, women’s desires have been manufactured by the patriarchy, and women ought to be re-educated to desire more empowering things. Because according to Friday, desire is something we’re taught, not something innate.
For me, this was the most interesting question that popped out of the book: Have Women’s, (and men’s for that matter) sexual desires been manufactured by society, or is it something innate? I think it’s a combination of both. The root desires cannot be changed, but how they manifest in fantasy is influenced by upbringing and society.
A common theme in the fantasies is to be dominated. Friday says that this particular generation of women have their sexuality undefined culturally, and so they default on submissiveness.
But why? It’s not obvious at all why that if you “leave women’s sexuality undefined” they will commonly fantasize about being dominated. Friday thinks this a bad thing and says it requires it will take a generation of educating women to take a more active role in sex and live up to their true sexual potential. In other words, she believes that women ought to be socially conditioned so that their sexual desires will be more empowering.
The implication of this is that: If Friday is wrong and instead, a person has an ingrained nature based on their gender, that would mean Friday does not accept women as they are.
The psyche compensates for unfulfilled desires. And so I would assume that domination/rape-fantasies among women in Western countries are more prevalent than with women in countries where real rape and domestic abuse are more prevalent. (I might be wrong - considering how one woman fantasized about her actual rape.) Whether or not that’s the case, the root desire of these compensations has to come from somewhere, and it is quite clear from my point of view that the basis of these desires is universal and biological.
Nathalie from the “Room 5” chapter says in the postscript of her letter that the more socially liberated and the more of a dominating position she takes on in her work, the more she fantasizes about spanking and bondage. Take this broader, and you will see how Fifty Shades of Grey is a bestseller in an age of feminism.
Friday thinks that women’s domination fantasies stem from shame from society, so when they are forced, they feel unburdened by this feeling. This may play a part in it, but I think there’s a myriad of more important reasons. #1), a dangerous and unexpected event produces adrenaline, pumps up the heart rate, which is closely connected with sexual arousal. #1.5) A sense of urgency helps orgasm come quicker #2) They cannot help but feel highly desired by a determined man, risking his freedom just to have her once. #3) It seems clear from a biological perspective that women who preferred dominant men would have a higher chance of survival. Our core desires are of nature and immutable, and women’s desire for domination is unsatisfied by today's political climate, which grows stronger in fantasy.
Friday claims that as a result of the ages of the patriarchy, sexuality has been owned and defined by men, but now it’s time for women to rise up and claim their sexuality back. I think this notion is fine, only if you neglect minor details like the entire history of mankind and their mythology, where it is the rule that the gods of sexuality were women.
She seems to be misinformed about how women’s sexuality is repressed in comparison to men’s. Men are far more restrictive than women about telling their fantasies and limit their sexual experience to the most necessary details. Men would love to talk about their sexual conquests, but are not taking any risks of turning each other on with the details. A straight man’s worst nightmare would be to share an erection with another. Friday notes that women do not have the same “locker room” talk as men do, but I doubt it’s any sexual oppression, rather, it probably has to do with the way women and men select sexual partners. I don’t see any billboard advertisements, education plans, or religious teachings promoting this strongly ingrained behavior. Because of its universality between different cultures, it’s reasonable to assume this is because of biological differences between the sexes.
My issue with feminists are with those who want to “educate” women rather than accept them and love them for what they are. They reject the natural being of women because they think the patriarchal culture has corrupted them, in other words, (if they happen to be wrong) they believe women of their natural state corrupt.
I get that I sound like the conservative using nature as an excuse to keep things the same, “look, it’s just good ‘ol mother nature, leave her be!” - and I might be wrong, as I am often, but what worries me about certain types of feminists is that they are more obsessed with ideology than they are of women’s well being.
Sexual repression has caused ungodly amounts of suffering, especially for women, which the sexual liberation movement has worked to alleviate, and Friday focuses on a lot. In addition, the new technology of contraception and antibiotics has apparently made sexual repression a need of the past, and books like these help to update our software in accordance with the new hardware.
On the flip side, surveys show that women’s sense of happiness in the United States has decreased since the 1960s. It seems to me that when you make people live incongruent with their nature, their well-being decreases.
You would expect clear proof of the opposite, namely that women’s happiness has increased by their sexual liberation and the variety of partners that are socially acceptable to have. Nancy Friday would probably say something like “Women haven’t had the time to adjust” or “We just need a couple more generations before the poisonous ideas become weeded out.” Yeah, but how many generations? For how long? A theory needs a condition for failure, otherwise, it’s just a blind ideology.
November 21, 2025
It’s important to remember that this book was written fifty years ago. At the time, it broke taboos so deeply rooted in society that many women didn’t even dare whisper their fantasies, let alone publish them. In that sense, My Secret Garden is not only a book. It is a milestone, a quiet revolution which has at least inspired me.
Of course, Nancy Friday would write it differently today. Times have changed, language has changed, and our understanding of sexuality has broadened. Yet the courage behind this book still shines. Even now, the freedom for women to speak openly about desire is far from guaranteed. Judgment, shame, and even blackmail still exist. In some moments, it feels like we are turning the wheel backward again.
What touched me most is the simple truth at the core:
that women’s fantasies matter. They are part of us, a part of our minds, our bodies, our histories.
I’ve always felt that same need to share my desires, the ones I have lived and the ones that still live inside me. They are part of who I am, and I refuse to be ashamed of them. My own book, Adventurous Designs, is in many ways inspired by My Secret Garden. Without Nancy Friday’s bravery, I’m not sure I would have dared to write so honestly. For that, I am deeply thankful.
Adventurous DesignsAdventurous Designs
Of course, Nancy Friday would write it differently today. Times have changed, language has changed, and our understanding of sexuality has broadened. Yet the courage behind this book still shines. Even now, the freedom for women to speak openly about desire is far from guaranteed. Judgment, shame, and even blackmail still exist. In some moments, it feels like we are turning the wheel backward again.
What touched me most is the simple truth at the core:
that women’s fantasies matter. They are part of us, a part of our minds, our bodies, our histories.
I’ve always felt that same need to share my desires, the ones I have lived and the ones that still live inside me. They are part of who I am, and I refuse to be ashamed of them. My own book, Adventurous Designs, is in many ways inspired by My Secret Garden. Without Nancy Friday’s bravery, I’m not sure I would have dared to write so honestly. For that, I am deeply thankful.
Adventurous DesignsAdventurous Designs
December 24, 2018
In this book, Nancy Friday collects and orders in themes sexual fantasies sent to her by women. She did that to make the point clear that woman fantasize and think about sex more than is often assumed. In doing so, she also wanted to encourage woman to not feel ashamed to fantasize, but to revel in it. Fantasy is fantasy and whatever it is you don't have to feel guilty about it because it doesn't mean you're going to do it.
I liked this book for several reasons. One is that she orders the fantasies in themes. As an aspiring scientist, I always like to order things in categories for ease of analysing them. This book serves both as a resource to understand the extent of female sexuality and fantasy, and can also be used if you want something interesting to read before going to bed. Another benefit of the themes is that there will be something of your liking for everyone. Even themes I did not expect to learn anything from but merely be entertained, I read things that helped me to understand my own thoughts regarding sexuality. The idea that my own thoughts are shared with other females helped me to understand and accept them.
Another reason I liked the book is that she included the less socially accepted fantasies as well, such as bestiality, masochism and rape fantasies. These fantasies might not put everyone in a sexy mood, but it is interesting to read they are quite common. It shows that for many fantasies is a place to let go and explore possibilities you would never consider in real life.
The book is quite old already, it is first published in 1973, but that does not make it less relevant. I don't think the themes Friday identified will have changed much as well. Also, her goal to make people feel less ashamed of their own sexual thoughts is not obsolete. I know this book helped me to accept my own sexual thoughts, and for sure I am not the only one struggling to do that. There is still a lot of shame mixed with sexuality, even in otherwise healthy relationships. I would be curious to hear if other people reading this book had the same experience, or whether most people enjoyed the book because of the wonderful smutty stories.
The last point I want to make is that this book is not only for women. As became clear in many stories in this book, men are often completely oblivious about the female's fantasies. This is a shame because instead of using those fantasies to create a better relationship, females repress them. The stories where people share their fantasies couples had a better and richer sex life. So men and woman: read this book, read it together and discuss your own fantasies. It is a good way to explore and embrace your own sexuality more, either alone or together, and that can never hurt. Or read it for the awesome dirty stories to get you in a frisky mood. A lot of the 5-star reviews of this book are because of that exact same reason.
I liked this book for several reasons. One is that she orders the fantasies in themes. As an aspiring scientist, I always like to order things in categories for ease of analysing them. This book serves both as a resource to understand the extent of female sexuality and fantasy, and can also be used if you want something interesting to read before going to bed. Another benefit of the themes is that there will be something of your liking for everyone. Even themes I did not expect to learn anything from but merely be entertained, I read things that helped me to understand my own thoughts regarding sexuality. The idea that my own thoughts are shared with other females helped me to understand and accept them.
Another reason I liked the book is that she included the less socially accepted fantasies as well, such as bestiality, masochism and rape fantasies. These fantasies might not put everyone in a sexy mood, but it is interesting to read they are quite common. It shows that for many fantasies is a place to let go and explore possibilities you would never consider in real life.
The book is quite old already, it is first published in 1973, but that does not make it less relevant. I don't think the themes Friday identified will have changed much as well. Also, her goal to make people feel less ashamed of their own sexual thoughts is not obsolete. I know this book helped me to accept my own sexual thoughts, and for sure I am not the only one struggling to do that. There is still a lot of shame mixed with sexuality, even in otherwise healthy relationships. I would be curious to hear if other people reading this book had the same experience, or whether most people enjoyed the book because of the wonderful smutty stories.
The last point I want to make is that this book is not only for women. As became clear in many stories in this book, men are often completely oblivious about the female's fantasies. This is a shame because instead of using those fantasies to create a better relationship, females repress them. The stories where people share their fantasies couples had a better and richer sex life. So men and woman: read this book, read it together and discuss your own fantasies. It is a good way to explore and embrace your own sexuality more, either alone or together, and that can never hurt. Or read it for the awesome dirty stories to get you in a frisky mood. A lot of the 5-star reviews of this book are because of that exact same reason.
May 24, 2010
[These notes were made in 1981:]. Naturally enough, I bought this out of prurient interest. And it is more or less what I expected - longish accounts of various types of erotic fantasy, linked with a facile tho' not by any means illiterate or vulgar commentary. It's printed on cheap paper, has a few typos (Brigid Brophy says no-one can bear to read pornography twice - hence it's never properly proof-read). It is not fiction; nor is it in any way scientific enough to be taken seriously as non-fiction. Yet, for all this, My Secret Garden has one purpose beyond the obvious. It is immensely reassuring. Those aspects of oneself which seemed most isolated, most perverse, have their echo in this book. One is not "sick" - or, if one is, one's in good company. (Note careful avoidance of first-person pronoun. Hypocrite!) And, of course, it was quite illuminating as to how far people will go in their fantasizing, although there is nothing here I haven't already met in the pages of Penthouse Forum. This book, however, lacks the almost flaunted speciousness of Forum's "reader contributions", and is in that degree more reassuring.
August 29, 2011
In turns titilating and downright boring, this was an eye opener in some ways. I know plenty of guys (myself included) with a long standing history of mentally going to the highlight reel of either past experience or fantasy to get them over the hump when they are having trouble finishing during sex. It really never occurred to me that women might do the same. Once I had the idea presented to me, it made perfect sense.
The psuedo-scientific approach was very lacking in any kind of organization, short of allegorically, but the grouping was enough to know when you were about to need to do some skimming over the more disinteresting portions, so I guess there is that.
One more eye opening thing that I got from this, was the PURE fantasy. I always thought of fantasies as someting you need to make come true. The fantasy for fantasy sake is another thing that just never popped into my head. Maybe the typical guy mind set of, "Oh you want something, lets get / do / find / buy whatever it is..." is just too ingrained in our heads, but I liked the idea. It made some of the more degrading mixed domination / beastiality much easier to stomache.
The psuedo-scientific approach was very lacking in any kind of organization, short of allegorically, but the grouping was enough to know when you were about to need to do some skimming over the more disinteresting portions, so I guess there is that.
One more eye opening thing that I got from this, was the PURE fantasy. I always thought of fantasies as someting you need to make come true. The fantasy for fantasy sake is another thing that just never popped into my head. Maybe the typical guy mind set of, "Oh you want something, lets get / do / find / buy whatever it is..." is just too ingrained in our heads, but I liked the idea. It made some of the more degrading mixed domination / beastiality much easier to stomache.
December 4, 2020
I remember reading this when it came out and being slightly shocked: not because so many women had so many fantasies but because they were so varied and well-developed. I've come a long way since then and I have an idea that women have, too, judging by some of what they've told me and some of the books currently available. I remember the scene in "When Harry Met Sally" where Meg Ryan describes a fantasy to Billy Crystal that seemed so vague when I was reading erotic literature at that time, by both men and women, and wondered where they found someone either so boring or (more likely) so reserved. A groundbreaking book, for men and women.
November 7, 2019
I would like to unread this / delete it from my brain.
November 15, 2017
Always good for us blokes to get a window into a world like this. Have to be in the know... and all that.
October 6, 2015
My Secret Garden was helpful in opening my eyes to female thoughts on fantasy, and more importantly, female thoughts about having them. Understanding the feminine reaction (guilt, shame, etc) to desire was my main interest in reading this book. Though I am not familiar with the pool from which Friday culled her samples, the feelings of self-hate are pervasive and sad. Why women beat themselves over the head for common human emotions is a question whose answer must be found in society, in the " nurture" side of our behavioral makeup. I don't believe it is our nature, no more than the compulsion to vomit in the bathroom after eating a delicious meal. Women are messed up and confused, accepting shame rather than joy; a practice which bleeds into other situations that compromise true happiness. How can a woman/person make authentic choices when fearful of the reaction of others? Though there are many rational and healthy basis for fantasy, surely this secret world is composed of lives unlived, too.
February 18, 2013
A friend here on Goodreads (thanks Petra) reviewed this book today, and one look at the cover, title and author and it all came flashing back. I have read this book! Some 20+ years ago, but oh yes, I remember it.
This is a book of short sexual fantasies of women. Dirty little short stories. The book was passed on to my with some other books by my older (and more experienced) sister when I was in my early 20's. Or it might have been my late teens, but I'm pretty sure it was my early 20's because I would not have been caught dead reading this in my parent's house! But at the time I read it, this book was a totally new, exciting, "oh my goodness", experience for me. I mean I did read my mom's Cosmopolitan magazines, but this was WAY past all of that!
I can't say I remember any of the specific stories from the book, but I remember THE BOOK. I remember the illicitness (at least for me, at the time) of the book. Thank you Nancy Friday for the memories.
This is a book of short sexual fantasies of women. Dirty little short stories. The book was passed on to my with some other books by my older (and more experienced) sister when I was in my early 20's. Or it might have been my late teens, but I'm pretty sure it was my early 20's because I would not have been caught dead reading this in my parent's house! But at the time I read it, this book was a totally new, exciting, "oh my goodness", experience for me. I mean I did read my mom's Cosmopolitan magazines, but this was WAY past all of that!
I can't say I remember any of the specific stories from the book, but I remember THE BOOK. I remember the illicitness (at least for me, at the time) of the book. Thank you Nancy Friday for the memories.
May 19, 2009
It was purely research...no, seriously!
I don't remember how I first heard about this book, but I think it was one of the first "erotic" pieces I read. It's a collection of fantasies submitted by anonymous women, at a time when repression was the norm. Some of the fantasies are vanilla, some are a bit scary, and some are quite hot. By the time the author/editor began compiling the later books in this series, women grew bolder in revealing their secret desires, and the later books grow hoter and raunchier, but this is an interesting introduction, and in a way a glimpse into the pre-sexual revolution.
I don't remember how I first heard about this book, but I think it was one of the first "erotic" pieces I read. It's a collection of fantasies submitted by anonymous women, at a time when repression was the norm. Some of the fantasies are vanilla, some are a bit scary, and some are quite hot. By the time the author/editor began compiling the later books in this series, women grew bolder in revealing their secret desires, and the later books grow hoter and raunchier, but this is an interesting introduction, and in a way a glimpse into the pre-sexual revolution.
November 23, 2025
Utterly repulsive, but also enlightening. Just imagine the number of married men who got with women who did not merely fantasize, but actually experienced, these scenarios. 💀
Read
April 18, 2024manifesting 2024 reimparo a leggere
March 18, 2013
Oh my good God, this book is filthy. A book warped with women's pseudo-psycho sexual weirdness. A book sooo vastly wrong and repellent to the natural karma of human sexual nature, it makes Fifty Shades read like a Teletubby romp. In fact, this book is sooo filthy you will find your hands blushing shamefully, just because you are holding it, they and perhaps other extremities will glow with guilt.
Unless, you too, are pseudo-psycho sexually warped you will feel like you need to go straight to church and repent after reading it.
Now let me get this point across clearly. It is sooo filthy that I wouldn't even tarnish my righteous catholic dignity by going into its content publicly, and it is sooo salaciously smutty that I dared not give it more than three stars because then family and acquaintances might assume I had the audacity to enjoy reading it. What? Never! That is, of course, impossible and just well, utterly utterly filthy! :)
Retain an open mind if you read this book and never digest content in the presence of nuns or priests.. oh but wait, what page was that fantasy on again?
Now lets see.. where can I get the sequel..
Unless, you too, are pseudo-psycho sexually warped you will feel like you need to go straight to church and repent after reading it.
Now let me get this point across clearly. It is sooo filthy that I wouldn't even tarnish my righteous catholic dignity by going into its content publicly, and it is sooo salaciously smutty that I dared not give it more than three stars because then family and acquaintances might assume I had the audacity to enjoy reading it. What? Never! That is, of course, impossible and just well, utterly utterly filthy! :)
Retain an open mind if you read this book and never digest content in the presence of nuns or priests.. oh but wait, what page was that fantasy on again?
Now lets see.. where can I get the sequel..
Displaying 1 - 30 of 313 reviews