nam!!! You say they aren't any "negative thing we could come up with" and then you turn around and call them cold, bossy, and particular?

Is this how you see an assertive woman? Cold? Bossy? Particular?

I say it that way low because in this particular example, you'd better...this sounds to me like it's being said by a cold, bossy, very particular person.

I started my response by saying there must be a more considerate way to express what we'd like to experience sexually in a relationship.

I suspect we all have our expectations for a potential relationship. Whether it be sexually, regarding cooking skills, fix it ability, what have you. But to express any expectation as you'd better...is a crude, rude, cold, & bossy way to express an expectation. In general said by a person much like the way they speak. IMO of course.

The expectations are not wrong, bad or any other negative
thing we might come up with. But phrasing it in such a way sounds bossy, & demanding & likey to be said by a person who has those personality traits IF they choose to express themselves in that way.

Exactly! And why wait months to find out? Although I do think that saying you better be good in the sack is tacky and would be a deal breaker for most.

How good the SF is depends on the two people involved and their feelings for one another to a very high degree, and then the difference of SF needs comes into play as well...but there is a better way to find that out then saying something so crass.

Ditto that! But he also must be very compassionate, as well as passionate, and he must be fun!!!! He must be honest and sincere, as well as sexy.

And did I say fun?

Part of being good in the sack is being fun, as well as having an active libido...it's the whole package. And this time around, and at our age both men and women should have done enough work on their own self growth, that they have all the desired qualities.

I will never settle for anything less... why would I?

I have kept out of this discussion for several reasons, but having read the remarks, I am more convinced that ever that I am being to conservative in my approach to the women I date.

From now on I am going to assume that she is as interested in SF as I am.

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I assume that men are as interested in a healthy sex life, but maybe that's not such a stretch?

From my experience men have been more willing to jump into a sexual relationship sooner than I would. As the number of dates I go on increases I do find more men at the same point I am. This is wanting an active sex life with the right person, someone I'm committed to.

But that is the exact complaint of the original poster - it's not the desire for a healthy sex life, but specifically the way in which that desire is communicated, as a threat or a challenge.

So, when you say "while the communication form is crude, the message is valid", you are ignoring the very thing that auto (and I) are complaining about - the form of the communication, not its message.

Once again, expecting a healthy sex life, and communicating that need to your partner is perfectly fine. But, making an ultimatum about it on the third date is a whole different thing. It is the latter that is off-putting, not the former.

Again, it is no different than making any other ultimatum on a third date (and I am not counting any joking ultimatums), be it "you better be able to take me on five vacations a year", "you better be able to keep up with me on my ironman triathlons", etc etc. It is perfectly fine to have whatever expectations you want to have, but the disrespectfulness of turning these expectations into demands and ultimatums is not attrtactive, and has little to do with simply being honest.

It is perfectly "honest" to say to a date that a good sex life is important to you, and is certainly much less revolting than the "you better be able to blah blah blah" comment that auto and I have both encountered. Agreed?

AGG

Sure I can imagine it, and I wouldn't scream about it. I'm not following the assumption that it's a screaming offense. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> It's the 21st century, and we're all aware that there are many different styles of dating relationships, and sometimes you get a major mismatch that has to be cleared up so people can go their separate ways.

I'm guessing you're like me in that you think a good sexual relationship is important in any long-term committed relationship, but don't find sexual demands appropriate on the third date.

If a man told me flat out on the third date that I'd better be good in bed or else, I'd simply say that he appears to have mistaken me for someone else -- someone who finds sexual demands on the third date appropriate. End of confusion, we go our separate ways.

I'm not following why you're taking such umbrage over someone else's dating style. If you don't like it, simply stop dating them.

I'm going to jump in again, having put on my body armor.

I have also experienced what these guys are talking about: Women who are very demanding about sex and the man's role in it. While the majority of women are not this way, I find that there is a rather large minority that is, maybe 1/3 to 40%.

This demanding attitude also reinforces men's beliefs that there is a huge disconnect between what women say they are looking for in a man, and what they really want.

What also amazes me is that their attitude is rather sexist. They seem to be saying "It is the man's job to make sure I am pleased." "It is the man's job to make sure the sex is great." If she isn't pleased or the sex isn't 'great' (as defined, no doubt, by her), it is the man's fault. I thought we had gotten away from that old fashioned thinking.

[color:"green"] Great book that you should read JE is "she comes first".

Dude - you just don't know the feeling of what it is like to be in bed with a guy and he doesn't kiss or caress or make any kind of attempt to be seductive. Just wants to undress on his side of the bed and climb in and then climb on. Talk about boring or painful.

How about the scene where you complain: "honey, I'm not ready yet" and the "mood" is lost for him?

Sex is like anything else - it needs to be negotiated in a loving and non-judgemental way so that both parties are satisfied.

And yeah - it is your job to make sex great for me, just as it is my job to make sex great for you. Part of meeting ENs, don't you think?

So I'll do you in a way you like and you do me in a way that I like and we can do each other in mutually satisfying ways. Plus we'll avoid doing things that the other doesn't like. ENs and LBs. How complicated is that?

Don't be a slacker.

V.[/color]

sunny...this sounds more like the kind of thing men say about their wives...

Yes, we are VERY familiar with this feeling.



It is a lover's job to be accountable for themselves first, then their partner. Read "Passionate Marriage" by David Schnarch. Great book.

The thing is, it's just a horrible question to ask, to ANYONE! I'm floored you've found more than one with this attitude. YUCK!

This kind of woman (or man with that question) is just going to scare away the kind, sweet guys (who'll probaby thing she's been around the block WAY too many times for their liking), and what do you think the other kind of guy will say?? 'Na, I really like to get off as quickly as I can - I'm not much into the hugging, caressing stuff. You do have a vibe, dont you?'. Aint going to happen. The good guys will run, the bad guys will lie.

AND, as we've seen here all too many times, just because the SF is good in the begining of the relationship, it does NOT mean the SF will continue to be good. Good 'dating' SF does not equal good 'married' Sf. Right?

Yuck, yuck, yuck! I hated dating. Wont do it again, either... this one ends, I'm done. Yuck!

[color:"green"]LO,

I've read Schnarch. What do you think accountable to yourself means?

To me it would mean do I think I did a good job? The best that I could? Did I make sure to ask for what I wanted? Did I make sure to give my partner what he wanted? Did I put on something to make me feel sexy like music or lingerie or perfume? Did I try to relax so that I could enjoy the experience?

That is how accountable I am for my own experience.

I really doubt that Schnarch was trying to tell us that we should be responsible solely for our own orgasm independent of our partner. I think that it was more along the lines of the two of you working to get things right for both partners.

I'll get out my book and find you some quotes to back that up.

We could start a new thread and debate it.

V.[/color]

I guess it depends on what you mean by accountable. To me, being accountable means me being honest and forthright. I honestly want my man to think he hit the jackpot. I want to make him see stars. Then I honestly want him to act as appreciative as a man who just saw the stars SHOULD act - which is with entheuiastic recipricocity. (no, i cant spell).

And, being accountable to myself, upon finding out he's not entheusiastic about reciprocating, I can tell him straightforth that I do not find that kind of relationship fulfilling, and ask him if he's willing to continue 'with some adjustments'. He can say no, I can leave, it's all very honest and above board. That's me being responsible for finding a man who can meet my needs.

I dont think that can be accomplished by an oral interview on the third date. - Dru