What does "sexually compatible" mean?

[Weird Harold]

...I couldn't post such an argument on a porn board because there are no Christians faiths that would support my presence here....but if there was one, please spread the word.

It may just be the particular congregation I grew up in and/or a lucky sucession of moderate pastors for that congregation, but the United Methodist Church I knew and nearly went to seminary for, would support your presence here.

That isn't something I can say positively, because I haven't dealt with any church for over thirty years except for an occasional wedding. However, extrapolating from the official Church position on whether grocery stores should be allowed to sell Playboy in the 1960's, I'd say they'd probably support a site like Literotica. They might have a problem with some of the content of an "anything you want to post" site like ASSTR, but in general, they'd defend your right to visit even those sites.

The United Methodists aren't the only denomination that take "liberal" positions on things like pornography and "gay rights" either. They don't necessarily approve, but they don't explicitly condemn either. No denomination is free of "Sunday Christians" who will publicly condemn "perversions" while practicing those same perversions in private, but there ARE Christian denominations that don't try to control every little detail of everyone's lives.

 

[Weird Harold]

I mean, when was the last time ANY of you (I'm specifically talking to those who consider themselves christian) asked your pastor/priest "What does the church feel about masturbation or cyber sex?"

1964 or 1965 -- Although the subject of "Cybersex" didn't come up.

And yes, I'm being serious -- the question of "self-abuse" came up in a Youth Group discussion session.

 

[flamesofdesire]

I'm going to try this one more time.

I did not make any judgements on her standing regarding sex before marriage, nor did I make any judgement on her thoughts on cyber sex. I did however find it contradictory (and not just her post...I mention I have seen similar ones before) that people use strong religious beliefs to substantiate their position when making a point on a 'porn' board....then I go on to say that even though I don't agree with all the beliefs of the church to which I attend, I couldn't post such an argument on a porn board because there are no Christians faiths that would support my presence here....but if there was one, please spread the word.

So my judgement was that it is hypocritcal profess such strong religious Christian beliefs as an argument while discarding the beliefs that don't fit today's choices.

Scalywag, before I say anything else, I just want you to know that I have alot of respect for you, and that my tone in these discussions is not hostile. It's in the tone of just having a friendly debate.

True, most christian faiths wouldn't support anyones presence here, agreed.
Yes, it's hypocritical to profess strong religious beliefs if someone is going to " believe" only the parts that are convenient for them.

But then there are the naive christians, who don't go any further than the basic do's and don'ts of the faith, and actually think that if it's not listed by name in the bible, then it's okay. Maybe they are being hypocritical, but they don't realize they are.

You mention that this is a porn board, and by literal definition that is what this is, but if a person is coming here and just going to the How To's and HT Cafe to read, talk, and ask questions about sex, then I don't think they would consider themselves to be visiting a porn board. I think of it as the sex board.

I would even bet that there are some people who believe that porn sites are a big no-no, so they come here instead.

As for this particular thread, my personal opinion is that although the question was asked on a "porn" board, by a person saving her virginity for religious reasons, and though said person participated in questionable activities,according to the standards of the church,.. she was merely being curious and experimental, while trying to stay within the boudaries she had set for herself. Therefore, no hypocrisy is found, and my judgement is for the plaintiff,..umm... i mean the questioner.

 

[Guest]

 

[Guest]

 

[Guest]

 

[Norajane]

And likewise I respect your opinion and those of most of the people here.

I think there's a very fine line here where you're seeing things from a slightly different perspective than from my vantage point.

In the name of tolerance, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

And that could bring us back to start of the thread - sexual compatibility is sharing similar views on sexual matters and matters relating to sex (like religious beliefs), respecting each other's views, seeing and sharing each other's perspective, or agreeing to disagree on some things.

 

[pplwatching]

And that could bring us back to start of the thread - sexual compatibility is sharing similar views on sexual matters and matters relating to sex (like religious beliefs), respecting each other's views, seeing and sharing each other's perspective, or agreeing to disagree on some things.

Not to pick nits, but I was posting under the impression that the start of the thread was using 'determining sexual compatability' as a justification for actually having sex before marriage, rather than as a springboard for discussion of sex before marriage. If I'm mistaken then I'm sure a lot of what I posted doesn't make sense in the context.

 

[Norajane]

Not to pick nits, but I was posting under the impression that the start of the thread was using 'determining sexual compatability' as a justification for actually having sex before marriage, rather than as a springboard for discussion of sex before marriage. If I'm mistaken then I'm sure a lot of what I posted doesn't make sense in the context.

When I used the word 'sharing' I meant the couple holds similar views about sex, not just they they talk about their views. IMO, there are some things you won't know about the other person until you start having sex, and things you might not even know about yourself.

 

[Guest]

 

[Valcorie]

sexual compatability

I don't think two people are sexually compatible or they aren't. It isn't like you find a sexually compatible soul mate.

Now, if you're into hard core BDSM, and your partner only wants to have sex missionary style with the lights out, then you might have a problem. However, I think there are very few people who start out a relationship as sexually perfect for one another - you have to learn eachothers likes/dislikes, become comfortable with one another, etc.

And if you want to do this after marriage, rather than before, it is completely your decision.

I am afraid I have to completly disagree. It is possible to just not be sexualy compatable. True people to learn and grow together sexualy, ok sex, can turn into great sex. BUT there are some that start out incompatable with bad sex, and it may grow into blah sex but it isn't getting better than that. My husband and I are a great example of that. We love each other, and communicate about it, but we are just too different with different sex drives, different likes/dislikes, and they just don't mesh. It doesn't mean we are getting a divorce, but we both could have had better sex lives with other people and that is a huge thing to consider when getting married.

 

[Weird Harold]

And that could bring us back to start of the thread - sexual compatibility is sharing similar views on sexual matters and matters relating to sex (like religious beliefs), respecting each other's views, seeing and sharing each other's perspective, or agreeing to disagree on some things.

Not to pick nits, but I was posting under the impression that the start of the thread was using 'determining sexual compatability' as a justification for actually having sex before marriage, rather than as a springboard for discussion of sex before marriage. If I'm mistaken then I'm sure a lot of what I posted doesn't make sense in the context.

I think you're both correct about the original question. It's both a question about "what is sexual compatibility?" and "Is determining sexual compatibility before marriage important?"

However, like most threads, the question and discussion go where they will as points and counter-points are raised.

Sexual compatibility, IMHO, is a relatively small part of the complex inter-personal compatibilities that determines the success or failure of a marriage. It is as important or as unimportant as the individuals involved make it important -- as long as they agree on how important it is.

For the second part, "determining sexual compatibility" is a poor justification for pre-marital sex -- IF that is the sole reason for having sex. 80-90% of what you need to know about sexual compatibility can be determined by frank and honest discussion without physical contact and the 10-20% that does require physical contact doesn't necessarily require a loss of virginity -- aka PIV penetration.

Each and every individual has to decide for themselves how much information and/or experience is appropriate for them -- whether it's sexual or some shared hobby/interest. I don't think there is such a thing as too much information/experience, but there is without doubt such a thing as too little information/experience.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Face it, sex is one of the things (main things) that distinguishes an adult romance from a rather juvenile, grade school type crush. Far too many people still think of romance in juvenile, fairy tale terms. Love is not about "Prince Charming" and Cinderella and "Happily Ever After". It's like the whole "I love you forever" thing. There is a problem with that: people die, so forever is not really an option. Unless the Mormons are right about being "sealed for time and eternity", I don't see this happening.

Sexual compatibility was a major issue to me and remains one. It's a critical factor that helped me choose not to be with a certain Englishwoman who wanted to be my slave for life: she wanted monogamy and I didn't. It was also a factor in her choice of a different man. I chose my current slave partially because she could accept that about me, and because the feelings were more intense with her anyway. Well, those and the fact that I didn't care to move to England and she didn't care to move to America (another incompatibility issue- geography).

In any case, marriage is often, as one poster put it, wrongly set as "THE GOAL", after which you can become complacent and let everything fall apart. It's a major factor in the divorce rate, when marriage becomes the "END ALL AND BE ALL" of romantic and sexual relationships.

And there is nothing wrong with satisfying purely physical needs. The body is as important as the mind and soul: after all, the other two wouldn't exist without it. It is time to stop dismissing the purely physical as unimportant, and to stop assuming that only emotions and thoughts count. Instincts matter too. Primal, animal drives count. Like it or not, man is an animal, only more somewhat more evolved than his simian cousins. The primal urges have a validity of their own.

However, despite what I just wrote, I already told my slave that if she were a vegetable, I would not put her in a nursing home. I would care for her and when she falls asleep, I would hire escorts now and then to cover my physical needs (hopefully, by the time that such an issue might arise, prostitution will be legal in all 50 states).

 

[pplwatching]

We love each other, and communicate about it, but we are just too different with different sex drives, different likes/dislikes, and they just don't mesh. It doesn't mean we are getting a divorce, but we both could have had better sex lives with other people and that is a huge thing to consider when getting married.

I am having trouble with the term 'better sex lives' in this context. In my case more orgasms and more frequent intercourse isn't what I equate with the quality of my sex life, but I'll admit I had to learn that the hard way. I realize that this may just be a case of word choice in your post, but I think that it's a common mistake to confuse having frequent intercourse with having a good sex life. The quality of my sex life is largely determined by the feelings that we have for each other and the intimacy of my sexual relationship with my wife. I tend to put back rubs, kissing, shared showers, holding hands, and love notes into the quality of our sex life, but it was something I learned over time.

I think it would be great if you could elaborate on things that you do to help bridge the sex drive gap and what it means in terms of the qualify of your sex life.

Earlier in my marriage I made the mistake of not realizing that I needed more than sexual intercourse to feel connected to her. When the sex dwindled the marriage suffered because so much was tied to the physical act of sex. At that time, we were not particularly intimate outside of the bedroom. When I figured that out and started working on being intimate and sexual with my wife in other ways, not just by having intercourse with her, things greatly improved in the marriage.

In hindsight, we have a better sex life now then when we were having intercourse once a day. When we're both in the mood to have intercourse, I tend to savor it more and we spend more time pleasing each other. We're open to trying new things now. I just feel more emotionally satisfied today than I ever have in my marriage, even tho I would like intercourse to be more frequent.

Sexual compatibility was a major issue to me and remains one. It's a critical factor that helped me choose not to be with a certain Englishwoman who wanted to be my slave for life: she wanted monogamy and I didn't. It was also a factor in her choice of a different man. I chose my current slave partially because she could accept that about me, and because the feelings were more intense with her anyway. Well, those and the fact that I didn't care to move to England and she didn't care to move to America (another incompatibility issue- geography).

I think that it's just common courtesty to address the question of monogamy before a prospective partner develops any serious romantic feelings. You can ask how important monogamy is, and make it clear that you don't want a monogamous relationship before the relationship becomes sexual.

This is something of a tangent, but I am curious about what "accept that about me" really means. Does she tell you that she likes this about you, is ambivalent, or only grudgingly accepts it because it's part of the master-slave dynamic. I would also like to know if you would change your position if your slave asked you to. In other words, if she told you that she wanted you exclusively would you break it off and move on?

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

At times, she says that she can take it or leave it. At other times, she is very aroused by it. I doubt that she would ever ask. I'm the one with a strong predisposition (that I have known about since I was 10, but have resisted for a long time), so it is up to me, and not just as the Master. She just doesn't want to be left out, and she never will be. Whether another person is there or not, I enjoy sex with her a great deal and could never exclude her. I just prefer to occasionally enjoy some sexual variety (including men at times).

The emotional stuff we have agreed to keep just between us (such as romantic kissing and cuddling). And I think that I wouldn't leave. I would just point out that when I am older, she probably WILL have me to herself. She just needs to wait a few years, for when I am too old for swinging. At the moment, she hasn't asked me to stop or said anything to indicate that she would want me to stop. On the contrary, she has revealed some voyeuristic tendencies and has roleplayed it several times when we are doing it alone.

One time, as a matter of fact, when we were just starting out with the relationship, and I proposed limiting the anal part to me and her, she suggested that I just request the other women (and men) to clean themselves out the way that she does. That's the one thing that I dislike about anal (along with the good things that I love about it): the shit on my dick at times. It messes with the germophobe in me. Yes, even on a rubber, it can still freak me out at times to pull a condom covered with it off my dick. Sorry if that is TMI.

Oh, and we DO practice safe sex when with other partners.

 

[warrior queen]

Earlier in my marriage I made the mistake of not realizing that I needed more than sexual intercourse to feel connected to her. When the sex dwindled the marriage suffered because so much was tied to the physical act of sex. At that time, we were not particularly intimate outside of the bedroom. When I figured that out and started working on being intimate and sexual with my wife in other ways, not just by having intercourse with her, things greatly improved in the marriage.

In hindsight, we have a better sex life now then when we were having intercourse once a day. When we're both in the mood to have intercourse, I tend to savor it more and we spend more time pleasing each other. We're open to trying new things now. I just feel more emotionally satisfied today than I ever have in my marriage, even tho I would like intercourse to be more frequent.

this post (ok, admittedly it's cut down a little!) is probably one of the best i have seen on lit for a very long time.

well said.

 

[lingersold]

In a situation like that, she might agree to her husband having an external relationship. If not, then he can most certainly masturbate and meet his needs that way.

I don't see it as a legitimate excuse for cheating.

Then I guess you don't see sex as a basic human need.

If you believe sex is a basic human need, then it really doesn't matter what tragic/casual circumstance causes one partner to deny the other sexual fulfillment. Masturbation is not sexual fulfillment.

If I was struck by a sexual death ray, I would want my wife to seek fulfillment in some mutually acceptable 3rd party. *wry grin*--that is of course, if she felt any need to have sex. The day will come when I will lay down the gauntlet. Especially since she stated profusely that she "wasn't always like this" before we got married.

In an effort to get back on topic, I will add that scientists have recently determined that people tend to find others more sexually attractive based on the relative dissimilarity of their immune systems. The more dissimilar your immune systems are, the more you will be likely to be attracted to them. This is allegedly picked up by pheremone. The study I read about didn't say this was the only factor, just one.

 

[lingersold]

Should've finished reading first.

Yeah, I hate it when I get too worked up about something to wait until I've finished reading the thread. Sorry for that throw back to 3 pages ago. I can see the discussion has moved on...

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

I am having trouble with the term 'better sex lives' in this context. In my case more orgasms and more frequent intercourse isn't what I equate with the quality of my sex life, but I'll admit I had to learn that the hard way. I realize that this may just be a case of word choice in your post, but I think that it's a common mistake to confuse having frequent intercourse with having a good sex life. The quality of my sex life is largely determined by the feelings that we have for each other and the intimacy of my sexual relationship with my wife. I tend to put back rubs, kissing, shared showers, holding hands, and love notes into the quality of our sex life, but it was something I learned over time.

I think it would be great if you could elaborate on things that you do to help bridge the sex drive gap and what it means in terms of the qualify of your sex life.

Earlier in my marriage I made the mistake of not realizing that I needed more than sexual intercourse to feel connected to her. When the sex dwindled the marriage suffered because so much was tied to the physical act of sex. At that time, we were not particularly intimate outside of the bedroom. When I figured that out and started working on being intimate and sexual with my wife in other ways, not just by having intercourse with her, things greatly improved in the marriage.

In hindsight, we have a better sex life now then when we were having intercourse once a day. When we're both in the mood to have intercourse, I tend to savor it more and we spend more time pleasing each other. We're open to trying new things now. I just feel more emotionally satisfied today than I ever have in my marriage, even tho I would like intercourse to be more frequent.



I think that it's just common courtesty to address the question of monogamy before a prospective partner develops any serious romantic feelings. You can ask how important monogamy is, and make it clear that you don't want a monogamous relationship before the relationship becomes sexual.

This is something of a tangent, but I am curious about what "accept that about me" really means. Does she tell you that she likes this about you, is ambivalent, or only grudgingly accepts it because it's part of the master-slave dynamic. I would also like to know if you would change your position if your slave asked you to. In other words, if she told you that she wanted you exclusively would you break it off and move on?

There's no reason that you have to sacrifice either. Winners in life are often people who refuse to compromise and find ways to get what they want. Why not have both sexual and non-sexual intimacy? One idea is to have more sex on the weekends, when you both have more time and energy. Instead of one time on a Saturday, two or 3. Also doing quickies in places where you theoretically get caught helps.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Then I guess you don't see sex as a basic human need.

If you believe sex is a basic human need, then it really doesn't matter what tragic/casual circumstance causes one partner to deny the other sexual fulfillment. Masturbation is not sexual fulfillment.

If I was struck by a sexual death ray, I would want my wife to seek fulfillment in some mutually acceptable 3rd party. *wry grin*--that is of course, if she felt any need to have sex. The day will come when I will lay down the gauntlet. Especially since she stated profusely that she "wasn't always like this" before we got married.

In an effort to get back on topic, I will add that scientists have recently determined that people tend to find others more sexually attractive based on the relative dissimilarity of their immune systems. The more dissimilar your immune systems are, the more you will be likely to be attracted to them. This is allegedly picked up by pheremone. The study I read about didn't say this was the only factor, just one.

It is definitely a basic human need. People have trouble facing the primal nature of Man at times. The body is as necessary as the soul, and instincts count as much as emotions. They shouldn't be relegated to a lower standing.

 

[papilllon]

compatible

To me, it simply means being with a partner you can't seem to be able to take your hands off. When having sex with someone makes you forget everything and the pleasure is almost too much, that's a good sign!!!

But well, even when the match is good, not every single time you have sex is that intense but still, there has to be some spice...

 

[taolanes]

I know for me, certain body types turn me on a lot more than other body types. I loooove the small petite girls and have a hard time with heavier girls. Also, I love a nice big ass and it always turns me on. Basically, sex with different women turns me on to different degrees, and it's important to find a relationship with a woman you are really attracted to

 

[SweetErika]

To me, it simply means being with a partner you can't seem to be able to take your hands off. When having sex with someone makes you forget everything and the pleasure is almost too much, that's a good sign!!!

I know for me, certain body types turn me on a lot more than other body types. I loooove the small petite girls and have a hard time with heavier girls. Also, I love a nice big ass and it always turns me on. Basically, sex with different women turns me on to different degrees, and it's important to find a relationship with a woman you are really attracted to

I don't think sexual compatibility is synonymous with sexual attraction. To me, compatibility's far more, and what's beyond that physical attraction. I also assume if I'm considering sex with someone, I'm attracted to them. I can be extremely attracted to someone, but that doesn't necessarily mean we're compatible; for example, we both might love and do very well with vaginal sex, but what if they're not interested in going beyond that, foreplay, exploration, talking about it, or want to do it far less/more than I do? I've had partners I found very attractive, but one of the main reasons the relationships wouldn't have worked out in the long run was we had very different styles and ideas about sex.

I wonder if many of the people who are unhappy with their sexual relationships mistook attraction for compatibility, figuring as long as they were attracted to each other, it would continue to be exciting, or get better.

 

[huelust]

SweetErika,
I think you made an excellent point. Sexual attraction is not the same thing as compatibility and it's easy to make that mistake. My bf and I have compatibility issues... but when I look at him he as as sexy and attractive as he always was. That doesn't change the fact that we are in some ways sexually incompatible and we have to WORK HARD EVERYDAY at making that connection in a way neither one of us have ever had to do before. It's not an easy or painless road. Yes, we are very intimate, loving, and open with each other outside of the bedroom so it is definitely a sexual issue and not a relationship issue. I wouldn't trade him for the world (he's a good man) but I'd be lying if I said I didn't wish for a more sexually compatible mate, and I'm sure he feels the same. Whether we decide to get married or not in large part is balancing on this issue. Perhaps for some people sex is a minor issue. For me it is THE issue that means staying or possibly having to walk away heart broken some day.

My 2 cents.

-HueL

 

[pplwatching]

Whether we decide to get married or not in large part is balancing on this issue. Perhaps for some people sex is a minor issue. For me it is THE issue that means staying or possibly having to walk away heart broken some day.

Obviously this is just my opinion, but (taking 'in large part' at face value), I think that you may be in for some serious dissapointments in your life if you walk away from an otherwise great man and marry someone else based on this concept of 'sexual compatability'. When you discover that your future husband's or your own sex drive and tastes change you'll be facing this issue again. By then you may have a mortgage, kids, dr's bills, tuition payments, car payments, more bills, etc. Hopefully when that happens you'll be married to someone who values you and your marriage more than he does 'sexual compatability'.

Obviously this is also just my opinion, but you'd be better served by finding a mate who would walk on fire for you, is capable of providing for a family, is good with money, agrees on how to raise the kids, shares your values and principles, and is willing to do anything to keep the marriage alive and well, and that you find sexually attractive. If you don't want to marry someone for whatever reason, then don't. Just don't get so focused on the sex that you fail to see, and value, either the strengths or weaknesses of your partner.