Comments | much_ado: so i was reading this morning...

much_ado

so i was reading this morning...

Jun 01, 2008 14:25

...in a classic example of all things that went wrong as soon as women were taught to read. you know, we think about things. and we put ideas together in strange and unusual ways. it's not as simple as the whole "men/mars, women/venus" phenomenon would have the pulp-reading masses believe, but there's definitely a difference in how our brains are ( Read more... )

intimacy, congruency, communication, sex

Leave a comment

Back to all threads

I'm not overly cocky in my technique, but... musicman June 1 2008, 22:28:19 UTC

It is like other aspects of life where one wants to find more directness and work at it from different ways. Beating around the bush too much is simply not productive. The more veiled one becomes in asking, the less clear the answer. Like the Monty Python question "wink wink nudge nudge Does she go?", a veiled and subtle approach when it comes to sexual satisfaction often produces unclear and confusing data. So I try, gently and softly, and in the heat of the moment, or before, or after -- or maybe during a five minute break before continuing -- "do you think if I did such and such, it might feel good for you? Wanna try ( ... )

Re: I'm not overly cocky in my technique, but... lightcastle June 1 2008, 23:53:17 UTC

and if she seems afraid of it, or bothered, or intrigued it is fairly evident.

I would argue that this is not always the case. (If it was evident, we wouldn't need the conversation.)

You tend to need lots of lube for the fakers.
Oh dear. "How wet she is" as measure of interest?

Re: I'm not overly cocky in my technique, but... musicman June 2 2008, 00:25:12 UTC

Not always as a matter of interest -- how wet she is can be also a matter of body chemistry. But in my experience that is then reason to try other measures, because also in my experience, dry is not good during sex. I'm 58 and have never met a woman who even once said that dry was in any way better. But I'm willing to learn new things.

As for others not noticing when their partner is reticent about the subject or not having a good time or even an orgasm -- I agree that many people don't know how to handle that. Some are as observant as lumps on a log. I'm just sharing my own experience, such as it is. YMMV

Re: I'm not overly cocky in my technique, but... redhotlips June 2 2008, 00:43:17 UTC

"Oh dear. "How wet she is" as measure of interest?"

I knew this would come up. LOL

Assuming consent is there, and the sex act will happen. He is skipping over many, many steps in the communication (that he does, but doesn't think of as communication, because his head just isn't framing it that way) before the 'how wet is she' measure.

again asuming consent, interest and intent in sharing a sex act, gauging how aroused a partner is, can be a form of non -verbal communication from her to him... or perhaps a case of interpretation on his part since communication usually has a component of intent to communicate, and one's body being aroused may not be an intent to communicate (unless it can communicate on a bio level? hmm. interesting thought)

Re: I&#39;m not overly cocky in my technique, but... musicman June 2 2008, 00:53:54 UTC

Put my foot in there again, have I? Shakes head. Old guy, old mistakes.

Removes foot from mouth and limps away...

Re: I&#39;m not overly cocky in my technique, but... lightcastle June 2 2008, 01:03:47 UTC

*smile*

Handled with grace, sir.

Re: I&#39;m not overly cocky in my technique, but... redhotlips June 2 2008, 01:33:51 UTC

na...not a foot in your mouth so much as I know what you intend to say here, but others will not. We've practiced knowing each other's heads, others don't have that insight into your intent purpose and probable thought process that went into your words.

Re: I'm not overly cocky in my technique, but... lightcastle June 2 2008, 01:07:53 UTC

Oh, I think it can be a good measure for a specific person/relationship. As a general idea across women... not so much.

Re: I'm not overly cocky in my technique, but... lightcastle June 2 2008, 01:11:03 UTC

Some are as observant as lumps on a log. I'm just sharing my own experience, such as it is.

Ahh... I think we are interpreting this in opposite directions. I am thinking in terms of the person who is bad at communicating it, not the person who is too clueless to notice.

Re: I'm not overly cocky in my technique, but... mycrazyhair June 2 2008, 00:29:24 UTC

Sure there are fakers, but some of us do sense these things. The fakers don't flood the sheets, for one thing. You tend to need lots of lube for the fakers.

Actually, there's enough variation in amount of natural lubrication among women that I certainly would not assume that a lack of moisture indicates faking.

Re: I'm not overly cocky in my technique, but... lightcastle June 2 2008, 01:06:08 UTC

Indeed,

Re: I'm not overly cocky in my technique, but... mycrazyhair June 2 2008, 00:53:10 UTC

Similarly, there's a fair amount of evidence that women can experience lubrication without any subjective sense of arousal.

"But just because a woman is a little moist, that doesn't mean she's going to report feeling aroused. ... Conversely, when a woman isn't damp, it needn't mean she's unaroused. To quote Dickinson on the topic of vaginal lubrication, 'Unwise stress has been laid on mucous flow as an adequate gauge of ... readiness for the entry of the male. For it must not be overlooked that there are women of strong passion, capable of vigorous orgasm, who show little or no mucous flow.' In other words, there can be a puzzling disconnect between mind and body."

- Bonk: The Curious Coupling of Science and Sex by Mary Roach, pp. 246-247

Back to all threads