Sexually Compatible VS Compatible Sexuality

[redpepper]

I like the analogy you came up with Mono. I wonder if some peoples fear about the game aspect would be that their partner would be drawn into the game and that they may not want to go back to playing catch... the two are very different, yet similar... each has it's place and each can be fun.

[MonoVCPHG]

Originally Posted by redpepper

I like the analogy you came up with Mono. I wonder if some peoples fear about the game aspect would be that their partner would be drawn into the game and that they may not want to go back to playing catch... the two are very different, yet similar... each has it's place and each can be fun.

I could see why fear might be a factor to someone in this. For me it is a much more defined case of simply determining if the person who plays catch wants to share that with someone who plays the game or would rather stick with others who just play catch. …(I actually don't like baseball so my analogy is almost laughable LOL)

I think some people could and others couldn't. So I feel some people can be sexually compatible in that they can enjoy sex together but the knowledge of other activities in sexuality may simply make them not want to share that part of themselves with the other person. Therefore they are sexually compatible but do not have a compatible sexuality.

I think this situation would be a death nail to monogamous couplings (who are actually monogamous) but is a much more manageable situation in multi-partner open relationships where there is no expectations to have all activities met by one partner.

[polytriad]

Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG

Sorry my friend, I think you might have missed my initial intent of my comment. It certainly wasn't about how to get someone to open up to playing a game LOL! I don't adhere to the "more of a good thing is out there" theory so to speak haha, but I do think if some one was looking to try to change thier partners outlook on this matter your advice is great.

Laughing out loud I must have missed you intent....

Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG

I could see why fear might be a factor to someone in this. For me it is a much more defined case of simply determining if the person who plays catch wants to share that with someone who plays the game or would rather stick with others who just play catch. …(I actually don't like baseball so my analogy is almost laughable LOL)

I think some people could and others couldn't. So I feel some people can be sexually compatible in that they can enjoy sex together but the knowledge of other activities in sexuality may simply make them not want to share that part of themselves with the other person. Therefore they are sexually compatible but do not have a compatible sexuality.

I think this situation would be a death nail to monogamous couplings (who are actually monogamous) but is a much more manageable situation in multi-partner open relationships where there is no expectations to have all activities met by one partner.

I thought you was talking about football...

[MonoVCPHG]

Originally Posted by polytriad

Laughing out loud I must have missed you intent....



I thought you was talking about football...

Haha!!! Don't even get me started about football...not much of a team sport kind a guy LOL!

[Ceoli]

Actually, the baseball analogy doesn't work well for me. Playing catch and playing the game access the same parts of me, just in different ways. I don't see one as a more complete version of the other. They are both different ways to express playing with a ball. I see playing catch and playing the game two smaller aspects of something larger. Both of them are ways to access that larger idea.

My sexuality is accessed and expressed in many ways. None of what I do sexually is exclusive to that.

[LovingRadiance]

For me I experience this daily.

I am MUCH MUCH more..... hmmm how to put it.

I have a lot of different things I like sexually, for your ball analogy, I like to play catch one on one, I like to play catch in a group, I like to watch the game played by people who aren't professional and I like to watch the game played by people who are professional, I like to play the game as well and by a variety of rules. sometimes I like to play the game with "the" rules, sometimes I like to play the game with "made up rules" to fit the circumstances....

On the other hand, Maca and GG both enjoy playing catch one on one, but NOT in a group. They both enjoy watching the game played, Maca enjoys watching professionals or amateurs, but GG PREFERS to watch amateurs play the game, GG prefers to play by the rules, Maca prefers to make up rules to fit the circumstances...

IF either of them insisted that they "wouldn't play catch with me" unless I ONLY participated in the parts THEY found interesting-I wouldn't get all of my needs met.

On the other hand, there is no need for EITHER of them to play ALL the ways I like to play.. we can each play the ways we want to and when one of them is playing a way I enjoy-we can play together....

[GroundedSpirit]

Originally Posted by Ceoli

I see playing catch and playing the game two smaller aspects of something larger.

Yes ! excellent. Small pieces of something larger.

Originally Posted by LovingRadiance

On the other hand, there is no need for EITHER of them to play ALL the ways I like to play.. we can each play the ways we want to and when one of them is playing a way I enjoy-we can play together....

There !
See - isn't that simple ! All in how you choose to look at it.
I like simple...........

Can I play too ?

GS

[LovingRadiance]

Originally Posted by GroundedSpirit

Can I play too ?

GS

LMAO.


Sure, why not?
Say hello to your other half!!!

[vandalin]

Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG

I recently spoke to Redpepper about the concept that people could be sexually compatible but not compatible in their sexuality. In essence - they can have great sex together, enjoy a wide variety of things in one environment or situation but have very different interests in sexuality as a whole.

I will take an attempt at an analogy. Take a person who loves to play catch. They spend lots of fun time playing catch with a good friend in the back yard and then their friend says "hey, why don't you come out and play a game with me sometime" The reply is "no thanks, I just like playing catch".

So now we might have a case where one person can't understand why someone who loves playing catch doesn't want to involve themselves in a game. The other person can't understand the need to add all the other aspects to what is an otherwise enjoyable and fulfilling experience.

Their "catch compatible" but not "game compatible"

Think of catch as sexually compatible and the game as sexuality as a whole.

Obviously there is only a problem if one person says "if you don't play a game I won't play catch with you" or "I don't want to play catch with you if you play games".

I'm wondering what others thoughts are on this? Does the concept of sexually compatible and compatible sexuality make sense?

I'm actually curious at to how you are defining "sexuality". And then looking at your analogy, I'm thinking that compatible sexuality would be playing catch while sexually compatible would be the game as a couple may like the same activities or have the same drive, but they do not have the chemstry required to be sexually compatible.

This analogy also holds true for the basic idea of sex and relationships. Some people like sex and want sex, but are not interested in relationships beyond sex.

Ok, my brain is everywhere right now...but those are the thoughts that came to mind when I read through the topic. Take what you will fro it and leave the rest.

[Ceoli]

Originally Posted by vandalin

I'm actually curious at to how you are defining "sexuality".

Yes, this is something that I was thinking about in this post as well.

I talked a bit in this post on another thread about how I've been defining sexuality in the context of sex education. The program I work with uses a model called "Circles of Sexuality". It describes five interlinked circles in which each circle represents an aspect of our sexuality, but each circle is connected to each other circle. So while they are separate aspects, they are still closely inter-connected.

They are:

Sensuality- Awareness, acceptance of, and comfort with one's own body; physiological and psychological enjoyment of ones own body and the bodies of others. This includes but is not limited to:

• Body image
• Human sexual response cycle
• Skin hunger
• Fantasy

Intimacy- The ability and need to experience emotional closeness to another human being and have it returned. This includes but is not limited to:

• Caring
• Sharing
• Loving/Liking
• Risk taking
• Vulnerability
• Self-disclosure
• Trust

Sexual Identity-The devlopment of a sense of who one is sexually, including a sense of maleness or femaleness. Including but not limited to:

• Gender identity
• Gender role
• Sexual orientation
• Biological sex

Sexual Health and Reproduction- Attitudes and behaviors related to producing children, care and maintenance of the sex and reproductive organs and health consequences of sexual behavior. Including but not limited to:

• Factual information
• Feelings and attitudes
• Sexual/reproductive systems
• Physiology an anatomy of reproductive organs
• Intercourse

Sexualization- The use of sexuality to influence, control or manipulate others. Including but not limited to:

• Rape
• Incest
• Sexual Harassment
• Withholding sex
• Seduction/flirting