When Sex Becomes Another Place They Take Control

There are parts of narcissistic abuse survivors often talk about first.

The gaslighting. The silent treatment. The rages. The blame-shifting. The walking on eggshells. The way they slowly stopped trusting their own perceptions.

But there is another layer many survivors do not name right away, sometimes not for years.

Sexual coercion.

Not always the version people have been taught to recognize. Not always obvious physical force. Not always a clear moment where someone says “no” and the other person violently overpowers them.

Sometimes it looks like giving in because the emotional cost of saying no has become too high. It can look like sex after hours of sulking, pressure, rage, accusations, or cold withdrawal. It can look like a partner acting wounded, rejected, punished, or entitled because you were tired, sick, grieving, disconnected, overwhelmed, or simply not interested.

And in narcissistic abuse, sexual coercion often becomes tangled with the same dynamics survivors are already trying to understand: entitlement, dominance, punishment, image management, gaslighting, emotional manipulation, and the steady erosion of self-trust.

This is not easy material. But it matters.

Because many survivors are carrying sexual trauma they have never been able to call sexual trauma.

The problem with the way we talk about consent

A lot of survivors get stuck because their experience does not fit the narrow cultural script of sexual assault.

They may think:

But I eventually said yes.
But we were married.
But I did not fight hard enough.
But I froze.
But I knew what would happen if I kept saying no.
But maybe I sent mixed signals.
But he says I am rewriting history.

This is where narcissistic abuse creates so much confusion. Consent is not meaningful when someone has been trained that refusal will lead to punishment.

If every “no” leads to rage, withdrawal, cheating threats, humiliation, accusations, financial punishment, or days of emotional coldness, then the survivor is not freely choosing. She is adapting.

That adaptation may look like compliance from the outside. Internally, it often feels like leaving your body, going quiet, calculating danger, and doing whatever will end the pressure faster.

This is why survivors often say, “I don’t know what to call it.”

That sentence deserves clinical attention.

Because when someone cannot name what happened to them, the trauma often stays trapped in shame.

Sexual narcissism: when entitlement enters the bedroom

Research has identified a construct called sexual narcissism, and it is painfully recognizable for many survivors of narcissistic abuse.

Sexual narcissism includes four main patterns:

1. Sexual entitlement
   The belief that one’s sexual needs should be met because they are owed.

2. Sexual exploitation
   A willingness to manipulate, pressure, punish, or use another person for sexual access.

3. Low sexual empathy
   Little concern for whether the partner feels safe, connected, willing, present, comfortable, or in pain.

4. Grandiose sexual skill
   An inflated belief that one is an exceptional sexual partner, often despite evidence that the partner feels disconnected, objectified, or harmed.

For survivors, this may sound familiar.

It is the partner who believes sex is owed because he paid bills, stayed in the marriage, had a stressful day, or “has needs.” It is the partner who treats a no as rejection, disrespect, betrayal, or humiliation. It is the partner who is deeply invested in being seen as desirable, powerful, sexually skilled, or irresistible, but shows little real curiosity about the other person’s experience.

He may be charming, seductive, attentive, or emotionally convincing when pursuing sex, then cold or contemptuous afterward. He may rewrite the encounter later and insist the survivor wanted it, enjoyed it, initiated it, or is now “making things up.”

That last piece is especially damaging.

Because narcissistic abuse does not only involve violating boundaries. It often involves controlling the story afterward.

Gaslighting around sex is its own kind of injury

Sexual coercion is traumatic enough on its own. But in narcissistic abuse, the injury is often compounded by gaslighting.

A survivor may remember feeling pressured, frozen, disconnected, afraid, disgusted, or numb. The narcissistic partner may later insist she was into it, that she started it, that she never said no, or that she is now changing the story to make him look bad. He may frame her discomfort as proof that she is frigid, broken, too sensitive, sexually withholding, or cruel.

This creates a second wound.

Now the survivor is not only trying to process what happened in her body. She is also trying to defend her memory, her perception, and her right to define her own experience.

That is one of the most devastating parts of narcissistic abuse relational trauma. The survivor is not allowed to simply know what happened to her.

She is pulled into court with her own mind.

Why refusal feels so dangerous with a narcissistic partner

In healthy relationships, refusal is part of intimacy. People get tired, distracted, overwhelmed, sick, disconnected, or simply uninterested. A loving partner can tolerate that without turning it into a referendum on the relationship.

In narcissistic relationships, a no often lands differently. It may be experienced as humiliation, rejection, loss of control, or evidence that the narcissistic partner is not being sufficiently desired or admired. That is when entitlement can shift into punishment.

The survivor learns the pattern over time. Refusal may be followed by sulking, accusations, emotional withdrawal, cheating threats, humiliation, financial punishment, or days of coldness. The pressure may continue until she gives in, and once she does, the narcissistic partner treats the encounter as though it was freely chosen.

This is why many survivors stop refusing clearly. Not because they wanted what happened, and not because they were confused about their own discomfort, but because their nervous system had learned the cost of saying no.

From the outside, compliance can look like consent. Inside a coercive relationship, it may be the body’s attempt to get through the moment with the least amount of harm.

That is not mutual intimacy. That is coercion operating inside a relationship where the consequences of refusal have already been established.

Hostile masculinity inside the home

Some of the research on sexual aggression discusses “hostile masculinity,” which refers to patterns of dominance, contempt toward women, adversarial sexual beliefs, and the belief that relationships are a power struggle.

Inside narcissistic abuse, this does not always look like obvious hatred of women. It may be more subtle, especially in public.

At home, it can show up in comments about women “withholding” sex, using sex to control men, or being responsible for male frustration. It may appear in the belief that a wife or partner should be sexually available because of the relationship itself. It can also surface in jokes, dismissive comments about sexual assault, contempt for female colleagues, degradation of exes, or criticism of the survivor’s body and sexuality.

These comments matter because they reveal the worldview underneath the behavior.

A narcissistic partner who sees women as manipulative, withholding, inferior, or responsible for male frustration is not entering sexual intimacy as a mutual experience. He is entering it as a contest for control, validation, and entitlement.

The controlling, contemptuous partner

One common pattern survivors describe is the partner who uses sex to dominate, punish, or reassert control.

He may pressure after arguments. He may push past discomfort. He may use sex to “make up” without accountability. He may become angry when refused. He may treat the survivor’s body as proof that he still has access, power, and ownership.

For the survivor, sex becomes less about connection and more about threat assessment.

She may find herself scanning his mood, calculating whether it is safer to refuse or comply, and anticipating how long the fallout will last if she says no. She may worry about being punished emotionally the next day, accused of cheating, compared to other women, woken up later, or pressured again when she is even more exhausted.

Over time, the sexual relationship becomes part of the larger abusive system. The survivor is not simply deciding whether she wants sex. She is trying to manage danger, keep the peace, and minimize the consequences of disappointing someone who does not tolerate disappointment well.

That kind of relational environment changes the body.

It teaches the body that desire is less important than safety. It teaches the body that boundaries are risky. It teaches the body to disconnect, appease, freeze, or perform.

The conquest driven partner

Another common pattern is the partner who uses sex as ego supply.

This is the person who may be chronically unfaithful, compulsively flirtatious, or constantly seeking admiration outside the relationship while still demanding sexual access at home. For this type of narcissistic partner, sex is often less about mutual connection and more about validation.

Being desired becomes proof of superiority. Getting access becomes proof of power. The partner’s body becomes a mirror for his ego rather than a person with her own needs, limits, emotions, and choices.

When the controlling pattern and the conquest driven pattern exist together, the survivor may experience the worst of both worlds: pressure and entitlement at home, betrayal outside the relationship, and then blame for both.

The narcissistic partner may imply or directly state that if she had been more available, more sexual, more exciting, more forgiving, or less “difficult,” he would not have had to look elsewhere.

That is not accountability. That is manipulation dressed up as an explanation.

Why survivors blame themselves

Survivors often carry enormous shame around this part of the relationship.

They may wonder why they complied, why they froze, why they did not leave, why they did not call it assault, why they still had sex after previous coercion, or why they sometimes initiated sex to prevent conflict.

These questions can become brutal.

But the nervous system does not operate according to a neat courtroom script. When someone is trapped in a coercive relationship, the body learns how to reduce danger. Sometimes that means fighting. Sometimes that means fleeing. Sometimes that means freezing. Sometimes that means fawning. Sometimes that means submitting because resistance has repeatedly made things worse.

A survivor may initiate sex not because she freely wants to, but because she knows the emotional climate will become unbearable if she does not. She may stop objecting because objecting has never worked. She may disconnect from her body because staying present feels intolerable. She may tell herself it was not that bad because naming the truth would threaten the entire structure of her life.

These are trauma adaptations.

The body remembers what the mind had to minimize

Sexual coercion in narcissistic abuse often leaves survivors with symptoms they do not immediately connect to the relationship.

They may experience numbness or shutdown during intimacy. They may feel panic, nausea, dread, or disgust around sexual touch. They may have difficulty knowing what they want, feel detached from their body, or experience shame after consensual sex in later relationships.

Some survivors notice pelvic tension, pain, loss of libido, compulsive compliance, fear of disappointing a partner, or sudden waves of anger and grief that seem to come out of nowhere.

The body may remember what the mind had to minimize to keep functioning.

That is why healing cannot be purely cognitive. Insight helps, but it is not enough. Survivors often need body based recovery, trauma informed therapy, parts work, EMDR, somatic support, and a slow rebuilding of choice.

The body needs to learn that it is allowed to have boundaries again.

Empathy that switches off

One of the most confusing things survivors say is, “But he could be so loving sometimes.”

Many narcissistic partners can appear attentive, affectionate, charming, romantic, or emotionally tuned in when it serves them. This is why survivors often struggle to reconcile the “good” moments with the coercive ones.

But selective empathy is not the same as safe love.

A narcissistic partner may access empathy when pursuing admiration, repairing his image, getting sex, avoiding consequences, or keeping the relationship intact. Then, when the survivor’s needs interfere with his entitlement, that empathy disappears. This is especially clear sexually.

A partner who does not care if you are afraid, disconnected, exhausted, in pain, pressured, dissociated, or emotionally cornered is not missing subtle information. He is disregarding it.

Survivors often spend years trying to explain their pain more clearly, hoping that if they can just find the right words, their partner will finally understand.

But the problem was not always a lack of information.

Sometimes the problem was that your reality became inconvenient to his entitlement.

Coercive control changes the meaning of “choice”

Sexual coercion in narcissistic relationships rarely happens in isolation. It usually sits inside a larger system.

Financial control, emotional intimidation, isolation, monitoring, threats, reputation management, spiritual abuse, legal intimidation, parenting manipulation, chronic criticism, sleep disruption, intermittent kindness, or blame reversal to name a few.

Once that system is in place, sexual autonomy becomes harder to access.

A survivor may technically be “free” to say no, but in reality, she knows exactly what saying no will cost her.

This is why we have to stop discussing consent as though it happens in a vacuum. A yes that comes after fear, pressure, punishment, exhaustion, or emotional captivity is not the same as a yes that comes from desire, safety, and choice.

Why this is so hard to talk about

Many survivors can name emotional abuse before they can name sexual coercion.

That makes sense.

Sexual trauma carries a particularly heavy shame burden. Survivors may feel embarrassed, contaminated, foolish, complicit, or afraid of being judged. They may worry people will say, “But you were married,” or “Why didn’t you just say no?” or “Why did you stay?”

They may also be protecting themselves from the grief of naming it.

Because once a survivor recognizes that sexual coercion was part of the relationship, the whole story may shift. Memories reorganize, the body reacts, anger rises, shame surfaces, and grief gets louder. This can all be quite destabilizing.

So this work has to be paced. Survivors do not need to force themselves to use words they are not ready to use. They do not need to excavate every detail before they have enough support. They do not need to prove anything in order to take their own discomfort seriously.

A good starting place is often simple:

“I felt pressured.”
“I did not feel free to say no.”
“I felt like my body was not fully mine in that relationship.”
“I complied to avoid consequences.”
“I am beginning to understand that what happened affected me.”

Healing begins with restoring ownership of the self

Recovery from narcissistic abuse is not only about understanding the narcissist. Eventually, the work has to come back to the survivor.

What happened to my body?
What happened to my voice?
What happened to my ability to know what I want?
What did I learn to tolerate?
Where did I abandon myself to stay safe?
What needs to be reclaimed gently, without shame?

For many survivors, sexual healing involves learning to notice their own signals again.

Do I want this?
Am I agreeing or appeasing?
Am I present or performing?
Am I connected to my body?
Do I feel safe enough to pause?
Can I change my mind?
Can I disappoint someone and still be safe?

Those questions may sound basic, but for survivors of coercive relationships, they can be profoundly reparative.

The goal is not to rush into empowerment language before the nervous system believes it. The goal is to rebuild self-trust slowly enough that the body can come along.

A note to survivors

If this topic feels hard to read, it may mean something in you recognizes the territory.

You do not have to label everything today. You do not have to decide whether your experience “counts.” You do not have to compare your story to someone else’s. You do not have to make your pain courtroom ready before you are allowed to care for it.

Start with what you know.

Did you feel free?
Did you feel safe?
Did your no matter?
Did your body belong to you?
Were you allowed to have desire, limits, disinterest, discomfort, anger, grief, or numbness without being punished?

Those answers are important.

And if you are realizing that sexual coercion was part of your narcissistic abuse, please be gentle with yourself. This layer can bring up grief, rage, disgust, confusion, and shame. None of that means you are going backward. It means another part of the truth is finally getting room to breathe.

Healing is not only leaving the relationship. It is coming back into ownership of your body, your voice, your memory, and your right to say yes or no without fear.

That kind of recovery takes time.

And it is absolutely possible.

If this resonated

At The Narcissistic Abuse Recovery Center, we help survivors understand the emotional, relational, and nervous system impact of narcissistic abuse. Our work is not about obsessing over the narcissist. It is about helping you rebuild self trust, reconnect with your body, and recover the parts of yourself that had to go quiet to survive.

You can learn more about our groups, classes, podcast, and trauma informed support at narctrauma.com.

References

Baumeister, R. F., Catanese, K. R., & Wallace, H. M. (2002). Conquest by force: A narcissistic reactance theory of rape and sexual coercion. Review of General Psychology, 6(1), 92–135. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.6.1.92

Blinkhorn, V., Lyons, M., & Almond, L. (2015). The ultimate femme fatale? Narcissism predicts serious and aggressive sexually coercive behaviour in females. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 219–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.08.001

Bushman, B. J., Bonacci, A. M., van Dijk, M., & Baumeister, R. F. (2003). Narcissism, sexual refusal, and aggression: Testing a narcissistic reactance model of sexual coercion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(5), 1027–1040. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.5.1027

Day, N. J. S., Kealy, D., Biberdzic, M., Green, A., & Grenyer, B. F. S. (2025). Coercive control and intimate partner violence: Relationship with personality disorder severity and pathological narcissism. Personality and Mental Health. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmh.70038

DeGue, S., & DiLillo, D. (2005). “You would if you loved me”: Toward an improved conceptual and etiological understanding of nonphysical male sexual coercion. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10(4), 513–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2004.09.001

Hurlbert, D. F., & Apt, C. (1991). Sexual narcissism: A validation study. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 17(3), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/00926239108404342

Krizan, Z., & Johar, O. (2015). Narcissistic rage revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(5), 784–801. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000013

Lamarche, V. M., & Seery, M. D. (2019). Come on, give it to me baby: Self-esteem, narcissism, and endorsing sexual coercion following social rejection. Personality and Individual Differences, 149, 315–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.06.022

Malamuth, N. M., Linz, D., Heavey, C. L., Barnes, G., & Acker, M. (1995). Using the confluence model of sexual aggression to predict men’s conflict with women: A 10-year follow-up study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(2), 353–369. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.2.353

Mouilso, E. R., & Calhoun, K. S. (2012). A mediation model of the role of sociosexuality in the associations between narcissism, psychopathy, and sexual aggression. Psychology of Violence, 2(1), 16–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026217

Murnen, S. K., Wright, C., & Kaluzny, G. (2002). If “boys will be boys,” then girls will be victims? A meta-analytic review of the research that relates masculine ideology to sexual aggression. Sex Roles, 46(11), 359–375. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020488928736

Sardinha, L., Maheu-Giroux, M., Stöckl, H., Meyer, S. R., & García-Moreno, C. (2022). Global, regional, and national prevalence estimates of physical or sexual, or both, intimate partner violence against women in 2018. The Lancet, 399(10327), 803–813. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02664-7

Storey, V., Pham, A., & Charles, K. (2024). Narcissism and intimate partner violence: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 25(4), 2569–2585. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380231221276

Vrabel, J. K., Zeigler-Hill, V., Lehtman, M., & Hernandez, K. (2024). Different components of sexual narcissism are differentially associated with specific sexual aggression strategies: An exploratory study among male and female college students. International Journal of Sexual Health, 36(2), 184–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/19317611.2024.2311142

Widman, L., & McNulty, J. K. (2010). Sexual narcissism and the perpetration of sexual aggression. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39(4), 926–939. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-008-9461-7

World Health Organization. (2021). Violence against women prevalence estimates, 2018: Global, regional and national prevalence estimates for intimate partner violence against women and global and regional prevalence estimates for non-partner sexual violence against women. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240022256

Zeigler-Hill, V., Enjaian, B., & Essa, L. (2013). The role of narcissistic personality traits in sexual aggression. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 32(2), 186–199. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2013.32.2.186

Zheng, S. T., Wallin, A. R., Brewer, G., & Lyons, M. (2023). Sexual narcissism and hypersexuality relate to sexual coercion in hookups among U.S. university students. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 52(5), 2197–2212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-023-02580-z