I think this is a relative topic because you expressed it so openly. I think the roots of it are much more prevalent that appears obvious many times.
You opened a solid concept and I think I understand what you 'mean' and your bluntness may be good.
First off, I think it speaks boldly to the misunderstandings most people have about sexuality - especially in connection with love & relationships. The whole concept that a single individual will enjoy and be capable of matching/satisfying any other single persons sexual preferences - especially over a long period of time is basically flawed from the start. It's like saying any two (or even more?) people would be expected to always be in the same mood, same state of mind at all times. Totally unrealistic.
To hold something like that up as an expectation for a good - or great, relationship is a prescription for conflict & disaster. But that's the 'old' model and people still do that !
The problem lies in when people tangle that up in the desire to have.....let's call it "special bonding sex". They're not the same thing ! And neither is a requirement of the other. It's entirely possible to have both. But people tend to lose site of that fact. They don't make the distinction.
We (mate & I) for example enjoy most of the specifics you mentioned. And there's certain elements that are more important to one than the other. But there's also that close, intense sex we have with each other that is different yet. And to broaden that out - that 'special' sex is not necessarily limited to when it's only the two of us. We've experienced it with additional partners also !
But we've also worked out ways that we can cover all the bases in some way over time by acknowledging that it's an important part of our sexual side and satisfaction. It's NOT a conflict.
But to close this I think maybe the important point to make in all this is that the particular wording you used COULD lead to misunderstanding in some (or many) . When you said "how do I go about telling a woman she's not good enough to complete my sexual side" that adds a distinctly negative and competitive tone to the discussion. And that's counter productive. It's not a question of being "good enough". It's no more than having different tastes. And like I say - these tastes can vary widely on any given day.
So having THAT type of discussion is a whole different discussion than setting up some list of parameters that must be met for a relationship that includes sex to meet. That's like saying we all must be in the total mood for the same type of food before we can eat every day ! Unfair & unrealistic.
Better to focus on methods to fold the different desires into the picture in some way that everyone get's to eat what they like best on some regular basis.
Hope that makes sense..........
Last edited by NeonKaos; 02-01-2010 at 04:09 PM.
Reason: correct spelling of "Kraven"