When in an equal and mutual relation, this is a condition of revelation of another self made willingly vulnerable to both parties. In its successful manifestation, it is the feeling or state in which the inner nature of a person is mingled and traded with the inner nature of another person. It is the kernel of women's oppression and practically the only thing women live for. The author asserts that men, do not take it seriously, deny their need for it and possibly can not even do it, while women are forced to do it. Thus this BGRff means something profoundly different for a man than it means for a woman.
Because of historically determined sexual inequality, an unsuccessful, failed version of this condition is the norm between the sexes. For men, female's status as an inferior class or caste, compounded with early rejections from the mother and incest taboos, make it difficult for him to submit to it unless he undergoes a processes of idealization. This idealization is different from, but often confused by the man for this BGRff.
Women become aware of how to produce this idealization because their existential and psychological fates depend on it. They need to give and receive this BGRff not only because their health and happiness is defined by it, but also to embetter their social status, and even to participate in culture at all. This is because they are only able to do so indirectly and vicariously through men. The awareness of this makes women insecure of their authenticity and makes them appear parasitical or devious.
The sexual revolutions that happened from the 1920s through the 1960's failed to improve this BGRff for women and men. These so-called revolutions only increased sexual exploitation by normalizing the expectation that women provide sex without receiving the former social protections (resulting from idealization: like marriage or polite demeanor for example) nor the social rewards (status and recognition, namely). The "free this BGRff" of the 60's was thusly neither free nor this BGRff.