Did I miss this story or did you not tell it?

A lot of feedback to think about, thank you all!

Great story, HSH! Can you please clarify what you mean by "time?" Do you mean, slow down the pace of the relationship, or spend more time together? Sorry...I'm a dolt today.

Dr. Harley completely disagrees with this.

Most women are not attracted to these things. These "bad boys" are very likely meeting some of the woman's important emotional needs. And women tend to put up with abusive behavior or lovebusting if their needs are being met -- women typically leave men for neglect, not abuse/lovebusters.

But a man must be attractive to a women to get that first date before he even has a chance to start meeting ENs. Which is confusing for a man because what gets him the second date is almost entirely different from what gets him the second or third date.

A However, I am having serious doubts EVERY human is able to reach these heights emotionally and/or physically.
And this is my concern exactly.

My first partner was unable to get there. while SF was fulfilling, it was a hard-to-earn price.
I did not have this problem again with two other partners later in life...
Negotiation was enthousiastic & effortlessly because these partners had SF on their EN list aswell.

Of course it's not impossible to get good SF in an uncommitted, renter's situation. It's just less likely to happen for a lot of women and less likely to provide permanent desire which grows stronger over time. This could have been the case with your first partner.

In the situations where you had good SF in renters relationship one of two things were happening. 1)Higher LB balances. You were meeting more of the woman's needs, less lovebusting and more time together or 2)She was performing it for short term effect to get her needs met back in a trading 'renters' agreement.

I am simply cautioning you to avoid making pre-exisiting desire a requirement because you need to find someone who specifically responds to you and your needs meeting.

They should also be genuine and not trying to impress every guy right off the starting block with the cheapest trick in the book.

I don't think two people who both have a high SF need necessarily make a good match anyway. Anyone can provide us with sex, if sex in general (rather than a unique attraction) is all we want. I know of a couple who did nothing with their time together except have sex because they both had a very high SF need. It got boring. They soon realised they were strangers, could be doing this with anybody and broke up.

You tend to need at least one person whose top needs are other things in order to keep the relationship romantic.

Dr Harley says if you are both passionately in love and meet his compatibilty requirements (energy etc) then you have nothing to fear.

Would you please elaborate on this, FF?

I find men attractive who can meet the top 5 female ENs, and are marginally physically appealing to me. Among the 22 men I've dated in the past 6 months, only ONE was good at all of them. (He broke my heart, btw)

But perhaps I've missed your point, so would you mind to clarify? Thanks, Z

As for the question on this thread. A lot of the responses from women seem to be along the lines of "Don't worry about the SF need meeting. It's guaranteed so long as her needs are being met." .

But do understand from a mans prospective, he is being asked to commit to a lifetime of exclusive need meeting in this area with someone who has not yet demonstrated an ability to meet said need. .

Can you imagine a woman with IC at the top of her list marrying a man who up till now has not met that need, but promises it won't be a problem after they are married?

I am a very very SF kind of gal. So much so I am studying books, doing yoga, researching something called tantric ... the whole nine yards. Any man I date will know this is a huge part of me (he can look at my bookshelves for one), and he will know this will be part of my marriage.

ETA: Stop selling women short here. It is a myth that women are not into SF.

Fascinating stuff. Thanks for the responses ladies!

While we are on the subject of compatibility, however, there are five criterion that I recommend to those who are looking for a marriage partner. The reason I have picked these five, which are usually not found in most tests of compatibility, is that incompatibility in any of these areas make the Policy of Joint Agreement particularly difficult to implement. As a psychologist, I save marriages by showing spouses how to change their behavior to create a fulfilling marriage. But the categories that I will share with you now are traits that even trained psychologists have great difficulty trying to change. And so when you date, look for compatibility in these areas.

1. Intelligence. You and he should be roughly equivalent in intelligence, within about 15 IQ points. Without having to take an IQ test, you can usually figure that out by comparing grades in school, although men are notorious underachievers in high school. College grades are a better measure of intelligence for both men and women. The quality of your conversation is another good indicator of compatible intelligence. Men who are stimulating to talk to are usually in your league intellectually. But if there is a large gap between you in IQ, both of you will tend to be bored by your conversation. The one with the highest IQ will find the conversation to be superficial, and the one with the lowest IQ won't be able to keep up. There is also a tendency of someone with a higher IQ to disrespect the judgments of the one with the lower IQ, and that's an absolute relationship killer. Respect is essential in marriage regardless of the quality of an opinion. If you both enjoy talking to each other for hours at a time, and you respect each other's ideas, you pass the test.

2. Energy. You should marry someone roughly equivalent to you in energy. If one of you lays around watching TV while the other scurries about and can't sit still, it's probably a bad match. The reason energy is an important determiner of compatibility is that so many of your lifestyle pre-dispositions will depend on your energy. Leisure time activities and sexual interest are particularly sensitive to the amount of energy you have. People high in energy enjoy activities that burn that energy, even after work, while those with low energy levels would find such activities to be exhausting. And regarding sex, the more energy a person has, the more sex he or she tends to need. Since leisure activities and sex are two of the best ways to deposit love units after marriage, incompatibility in these areas can make it very difficult for a couple to stay in love.

3. Social Interest. If one of you is socially outgoing and the other is an introvert, that difference can make the planning of social activities very difficult. The Policy of Joint Agreement dictates that you don't do anything unless you can both agree, and in marriages of extroverts to introverts, their area of mutual social comfort is very narrow. The extrovert will not be able to get to know as many people as he or she would like because the introvert hates meeting new people. And the introvert will be constantly challenged to tread into the terrifying waters of introductions. Yet, I am very much opposed to spouses going their separate ways after marriage (one goes to a party and the other stays home), so the social interest difference require very creative solutions to keep them together yet make their social lives happy for both of them.

4. Cultural Background. Culture determines a host of personal sensitivities. Take Christmas, for example. In the American culture, Christmas is usually a big deal for most people. But imagine growing up in a family where every year Christmas was celebrated with zeal, only to discover after marriage that you cannot celebrate Christmas at all. The Policy of Joint Agreement dictates that you don't do anything unless you can both enthusiastically agree and because the person you married comes from a family that finds Christmas offensive, you do not celebrate it. Even if your spouse were to give you permission to celebrate Christmas, his background will still make such a celebration very uncomfortable to him. From my perspective, The Policy of Joint Agreement would rule Christmas out until a way is found to celebrate it with mutual enthusiasm.

Cultural background does not only dictate sensitivities, but it also dictates certain skills in meeting emotional needs. In some cultures, outward displays of affection are discouraged, and yet you may need that from the person you married. To meet your emotional need, he must not only go against his cultural training, but he must learn to do something that he was never taught.

Sometimes when two people are in love, they feel they can overcome cultural barriers. But that's usually because their relationship has been rather brief. They have not yet had to wrestle with some of the conflicts that culture imposes on them. I counseled one couple who had fallen in love, yet one could only speak Spanish and the other could only speak English. Granted they could eventually learn each other's language, but with that would come a host of cultural differences that might be much more difficult to overcome. Time eventually proved to both of them that their relationship was not meant to be.

5. Values. Moral values usually dictate how we behave. The Policy of Joint Agreement and the Policy of Radical Honesty are moral values that I encourage all married couples to adopt because they create and sustain love. But even when these two important values are agreed to at the time of marriage, conflicts with other moral values can make the creation of a compatible lifestyle very difficult to achieve. Getting back to our Christmas example, it's a cultural difference that makes a spouse unskilled in knowing how to celebrate Christmas. But if you marry an Orthodox Jew, it's more than skill that will be a problem. He will probably be deeply offended by such a celebration. And that offense comes from his moral convictions, not just his cultural background. A discussion of values is always a good idea when on a date, because if you find your values to be very divergent, it will make it difficult for you to agree on a lifestyle that you enthusiastically share.

A question often asked in a compatibility test is "Would you be willing to give up your religion to please your spouse?" It's not really a fair question, because it usually doesn't come to that drastic measure. But the point is important, and I would rephrase the question a little differently. I would ask, "Do you have any beliefs that would prevent you from following the Policy of Joint Agreement?" That is actually more to the point. Is there some belief that is so important to you that you would be willing to let your spouse suffer rather that give it up? If so, you should be certain that your spouse shares the same belief.

The point in all of this is that wide differences in any of these five characteristics of people make it difficult, but not impossible, to create a compatible lifestyle. When dating, if you try to follow the Policy of Joint Agreement (never do anything without an enthusiastic agreement), you will be able to pick up on areas of incompatibility immediately. And if you find yourself fighting a difference in one of these characteristics, it's reasonable to come to the conclusion that it's not worth the effort to try to resolve it. That's when you break up and start in all over again with someone else.

Its like these writers have never heard of having sex for fun. They probably never have.

Specifically all of their needs met in a secure and committed relationship.