[ParetoCaretheStare]

I feel as though it's hard for me to completely fall in love with someone unless they're able to keep me completely satisfied in bed. Anyone else feel this way? And I'm superficial in that aspect too. Due to my self confidence issues in being a curvy-framed chick, my guy needs to be tall and strong, with lots of ability to love me unconditionally. I thought I had this only once in my life, but apparently it wasn't love, so I left him. Anyone else idealistic about bedroom tangos? And I know that love is blind, and I do love a lot of people, I just can't imagine being in bed with them, that's an entirely different story.
Biology is biology, and compatibility is compatibility. Anyone else agree?

 

[GoodOldDreamer]

I'm never in bed with someone until I'm completely in love with them, so... no.

 

[Thalassa]

Yeah you sound ridiculously picky. I mean, I expect a man to satisfy me in bed. I will not tolerate a man who won't make me orgasm, who won't compromise and do some things he knows I like, or ask me if I like this or that.

But you may find a guy who is totally giving in bed, who satisfies your every whim - and he may be a 60 year old. Are you prepared for that? I mean, you may have a lover with a beautiful body and who is reasonably considerate who just won't do a certain thing, or has issues about this or that (which has nothing to do with you). You may have the best lover ever, and he may be an ugly geezer.

Sex is highly important to me, but I think you're being pretty ridiculous if you actually *found that* and left the guy, anyway. Unless he was hurting you in some way, or just unacceptable in another aspect, like mooching off of you for money and refusing to work.

 

[Thalassa]

Also forgot to mention that some men are better at supplying exciting, interesting sex, while others may be better at building tension with foreplay.

I think it may be easier to teach Mr. Exciting, Interesting to do better foreplay than it is to make Mr. Gentle Extended Foreplay to be Exciting, Interesting.

You can't expect one person to be all things, but remember some people are reasonably teachable.

Pick what you value most and try to work with that.

 

[Kyandigaru]

I feel as though it's hard for me to completely fall in love with someone unless they're able to keep me completely satisfied in bed. Anyone else feel this way? And I'm superficial in that aspect too. Due to my self confidence issues in being a curvy-framed chick, my guy needs to be tall and strong, with lots of ability to love me unconditionally. I thought I had this only once in my life, but apparently it wasn't love, so I left him. Anyone else idealistic about bedroom tangos? And I know that love is blind, and I do love a lot of people, I just can't imagine being in bed with them, that's an entirely different story.
Biology is biology, and compatibility is compatibility. Anyone else agree?

I don't think you sound picky, or shallow. We all look for something different when it comes to a partner.
While I want to fall for the personality THEN the sex, I rather look for what ELSE is/can be important.

Try finding something else that isn't only physical with a man. Can he like hiking or motorcyles? Will be have a great sense of humor and know how to keep a conversation going? You know just other things that can carry one when the two of you aren't fucking... No i'm not being funny here, actually being serious.

I used to and still kinda do, have a hard time looking for a compatible partner. Someone that can take my agressiveness and understand my need for alone time. When I have found this first, I will hopefully discover how sexaully compatible we are. Everything is a gamble and love is no different.

 

[Kyandigaru]

Also forgot to mention that some men are better at supplying exciting, interesting sex, while others may be better at building tension with foreplay.

I think it may be easier to teach Mr. Exciting, Interesting to do better foreplay than it is to make Mr. Gentle Extended Foreplay to be Exciting, Interesting.

You can't expect one person to be all things, but remember some people are reasonably teachable.

Pick what you value most and try to work with that.

I totally agree with that! Some men lack romance, but are great with the hands on "let's go!" time of mentality when it comes to sex. Other are great with romance, but lack competence in the bedroom. Then there's that small percentage that are good at romance AND the hardcore stuff....<----*gets off computer to find him*

 

[ParetoCaretheStare]

Yeah you sound ridiculously picky. I mean, I expect a man to satisfy me in bed. I will not tolerate a man who won't make me orgasm, who won't compromise and do some things he knows I like, or ask me if I like this or that.

But you may find a guy who is totally giving in bed, who satisfies your every whim - and he may be a 60 year old. Are you prepared for that? I mean, you may have a lover with a beautiful body and who is reasonably considerate who just won't do a certain thing, or has issues about this or that (which has nothing to do with you). You may have the best lover ever, and he may be an ugly geezer.

Sex is highly important to me, but I think you're being pretty ridiculous if you actually *found that* and left the guy, anyway. Unless he was hurting you in some way, or just unacceptable in another aspect, like mooching off of you for money and refusing to work.

You have some good points, there, Fourtines, although I really am strictly talking about biology, as well. Pheromones, as well, have a lot of do with sexual attraction, as well as values coming together. I also wanted to talk about idealism and love life. For what good is anything if it doesn't have the best reaction you've expected? The puzzle pieces must fit together, physically, as well. Because before you know it, the honeymoon period is gone, and you're beginning to realize that you're even incompatible in the sack, and not only because he's got jelly in his belly, honey. I guess it's true that I'd have to entirely fall in love with the person outside of the bedroom, which now that I think about it I have done, but part of the idealist personality is never really being completely satisfied, and that's that issue I wanted to address. Do couples ever really feel EXACTLY the same way?

 

[ParetoCaretheStare]

I totally agree with that! Some men lack romance, but are great with the hands on "let's go!" time of mentality when it comes to sex. Other are great with romance, but lack competence in the bedroom. Then there's that small percentage that are good at romance AND the hardcore stuff....<----*gets off computer to find him*

Unfortunately as an Idealist I feel as though these guys are either all taken, or scumbags who are simply looking to ram us. My grandmother wasn't reunited with her lover until she turned 60...the first time she fell in love with him was when she was 18.

They tell us, "find balance in your life, exercise, eat brain as well as vegan food"...for what good is any of this if our feelings of mutuality are never equally exchanged, the balance is always somewhat off, for there to exist a connection with someone who thinks about you even more than the person sleeping right next to you does...?

 

[MyName]

You can't expect someone to love you unconditionally if you're not going to do the same.

 

[Chipps]

Nope, I don't get.

Sex, for me, is the least important aspect of a relationship. Not saying I won't enjoy it, but that soooooo many more important factors exist between two people...to me.

I know alot of people don't think like that, but I do. I actually have gotten to the point where hearing "Sex is the most important part of any relationship" is a turn off. I hate it. I could never date someone who believed that.

Yea, orgasms feel good, but I certainly don't want to spend the rest of my life doing it. I actually don't mind if I don't orgasm. I like the intimacy involved in sex. The closeness and togetherness. When people focus too heavily on the orgasm, it seems to hedonistic to me.

 

[Chipps]

with lots of ability to love me unconditionally.

Yea, I'm gonna disagree with this right here. Love is extremely conditional for me. Hell, for most people. Saying that you want to be loved unconditionally seems extremely self-centered. I can't love a person who cheats on me, hits me, treats me like crap. My love for someone is based upon how they see me and treat me and feel about me. A person only gets my love under certain conditions, and I think thats the way it should be for all people. I can't respect someone who give their love, attention, affection, respect etc away like penny candy.

 

[ParetoCaretheStare]

That's cool, but of course abusive relationships are an entirely different story. Noone wants to be hurt in a normal, loving relationship, I'm sure. And giving away love and affection to other people is selfish to say in and of itself. When one spends time with their loved one, the ultimate love and affection should be given, but the amount and limit is a representation of how that person is. I love everyone, but when I respect and care for all people in a somewhat motherly-proud-sister kind of way...nothing sexual unless I'm in a developing relationship with someone who feels the same way about me. Selfishness is subjective, because a person who loves his or herself will reflect on the world in a loving fashion. What are the boundaries to a committed relationship? Where's the crossing line that says that certain actions are acceptable and others aren't? Emotional cheating is committed by everyone, because attraction cannot only be with one person. The physical act of love, though, through intimate coalescence is the crossing point into committed relationship status, but values must be shared so both partners feel the same way, in my opinion. Depending on the time in life, some are more willing to experience "free love" rather than commitment. Love is never selfish, I'm purely talking about idealist sex when everything else works. BIOLOGICALLY SPEAKING, even if fertilization can still take place, I'm talking about MUTUAL SATISFACTION THROUGH AND THROUGH. I don't mean to be biased, but a lot of men don't know that the orgasms they thought they hit with their partners weren't actually what they thought it was, but passivity can be a factor because love can override these unfulfilled characteristics since the relationship and the other person is more important to her..and vice versa for men as well, I'm sure in many cases.

 

[MNiS]

I pretty much agree with @GoodOldDreamer on this and @Chipps .

Sex is pretty important but it's definitely not the most important aspect of a relationship and I'm not into the whole casual sex ordeal as that's just asking for trouble in the long term as it can turn into messy unwanted attachments from one person that isn't reciprocated which is why I avoid one-night stands, FWBs, and other such nonsense.

Don't get me wrong though, I don't neglect that aspect of a relationship but to me there are much better areas to focus on than the physical aspects.

 

[Razare]

And I know that love is blind, and I do love a lot of people, I just can't imagine being in bed with them, that's an entirely different story.
Biology is biology, and compatibility is compatibility. Anyone else agree?

I thought justice was blind? lol It could apply to love, of a certain sort, sure.

I don't agree with a lot of what you've posted. Not that it's incorrect, I think it resembles what a lot of people think. It probably matches what I used to think.

When you talk about unconditional love, maybe that's what it was, I wasn't there, so I can't say. As I see it, that kind of love is truly unconditional if, your partner cheats on you with another woman, you still love them. My partner cheated on me, and I still loved her; however, that love was conditional because I immediately became tainted with jealousy and anger.

Love + Jealousy + Anger is not unconditional love.

Unconditional love is if my partner tells me they've cheated on me, and I feel no pain, nor anger, or jealousy. At most, I might feel sorrow. Sorry for them, that they've done such a thing to themselves. This does not mean I would keep them as my partner. The situation may demand we part company... but not because I'm angry or jealous or upset but because it is the moral thing to do.

Such a love can be called unconditional. I just bring this up because that term is thrown around a lot without thinking of what it actually means.

 

[basementbugs]

No, I don't care whether anyone can keep me "satisfied in bed", because I don't have any sexual needs... though if you include being a good cuddler and not hogging the blankets or thrashing about all night, then yeah, I want to be "satisfied in bed".

 

[Paradox1987]

Hmmm, I too am on the sex is important, but it's not the most important thing in a relationship bandwagon. Once the honeymoon period is gone, I'd much rather have a compatible team mate. Life together will take priority over great passionate sex.

As for all the good guys/girls are taken, well, sure some of them are. But then again, enough whackjobs are also taken to assuage my mind that some good people are still also single .

 

[Thalassa]

You have some good points, there, Fourtines, although I really am strictly talking about biology, as well. Pheromones, as well, have a lot of do with sexual attraction, as well as values coming together. I also wanted to talk about idealism and love life. For what good is anything if it doesn't have the best reaction you've expected? The puzzle pieces must fit together, physically, as well. Because before you know it, the honeymoon period is gone, and you're beginning to realize that you're even incompatible in the sack, and not only because he's got jelly in his belly, honey. I guess it's true that I'd have to entirely fall in love with the person outside of the bedroom, which now that I think about it I have done, but part of the idealist personality is never really being completely satisfied, and that's that issue I wanted to address. Do couples ever really feel EXACTLY the same way?

I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. I understand the importance of pheromones, extremely. I know the pieces must come together physically. When did I say that they didn't?

I couldn't be "in love" with a man I didn't enjoy being with sexually, that's crazy.

I'm just saying you can't necessarily have exactly the perfect dream man, necessarily. You may find a man who has everything you want, but he'll be older than you expected, or may not be as talkative as you like.

It's good to have standards, but there is no dream man.

 

[TrailMix]

I disagree... But I'm also an NT and not physically-minded to be honest lolzzzzzz. Anyway, I think that sex is just something fun to do with someone you love and yes, biologically, it can create a very strong bond, but in my mind, that is not love. Love is your best friend who you would do anything for. If my boyfriend's penis fell off, I would still be with him because he is my best friend and I love him for who he is as a person. I'd be disappointed that I could no longer please him in a sexual way, but the fun we have together and the intimate connection we share on a personal level would trump that.

I dont really have many sexual needs and for me, its more the thought that counts than actually being satisfied. In my mind, sex just isnt all that important and isnt all that its cracked up to be. Its like a popsicle on a hot day, not water in the desert. You cant expect every man to be automatically fantastic in bed, but you can both grow and learn together how to please each other and it might take a while, but I'm sure you could make it work with almost anyone as long as there is an open and honest path of communication between you two

 

[626Stitch]

Sorry for them, that they've done such a thing to themselves.

Id rather someone was angery at me than have condescending pity

And why is it the moral thing to do. Indidelity is only immoral insofar as it hurts other people (which it does frequently its true). But if your not feeling jealous and angry than have you been hurt. My guess is that you would have these feelings wether you like it or not. What you seem to be talking about is using self rightousnes as a defence mechenism.

 

[Fizz]

Yea, I'm gonna disagree with this right here. Love is extremely conditional for me. Hell, for most people. Saying that you want to be loved unconditionally seems extremely self-centered. I can't love a person who cheats on me, hits me, treats me like crap. My love for someone is based upon how they see me and treat me and feel about me. A person only gets my love under certain conditions, and I think thats the way it should be for all people. I can't respect someone who give their love, attention, affection, respect etc away like penny candy.

That's something I never understood about people, when they want "unconditional love". I think about all the horrible things someone could do to you but it would still be considered "unconditional" while others might just say you're fucking crazy or deluded if you let someone treat you like shit. There has to be conditions for people to love each other. If they do not benefit in any way, why would they bother?

I think the closest thing to "unconditional" love is that between family members but even then, that's stretching it.