SexValues quiz

Mine is not what I thought it would be. I never considered myself 'hypersexual' or 'deviant'!

 

Maybe you're right. You going to do the quiz JT??

 

Depending on my mood I could probably answer as more deviant, seems about right though.

 

It is interesting how that is being calculated. I also hesitated at the 'penis' question. The porn and masturbation questions were easier to answer .

 

Haha! Ermmm, it's easier to be honest on a quiz than on a thread I think! But I think I agree with your comment on the dominance. It can depend on a lot, your mood... partner etc. It's like some fantasies isn't it. I've always had one particular kinky fantasy I've never felt comfortable asking someone to play out with me I know that much

 

I've never fantasised about a threesome. It just doesn't appeal to me I like to concentrate fully on the other person but I can see how it could be appealing to some.

 

To me, both paragraphs are two sides of the same coin, and both are being "serious." A lot of what we wrestle with is realizing and accepting who and how we are in an often lifelong context of repression and suppression. Much of what we repress and suppress, hide, are things culture, our environment, has conditioned us to think and feel are "wrong, bad, unacceptable, perverse,________" (i.e., nothing good).

i think, usually, the first part of our self to begin to question and find acceptance is our cognitive, rational self. But the process of self realization and self acceptance is not necessarily a clean, cut and dried, instant process. While our cognitive parts may see and accept us, our emotions are still conditioned against us, so we feel things like "intimidation" and outright fear. "Deer in the headlights" is another way of saying "ambivalent?" i think a lot of that ambivalence comes because our emotions are not yet reconditioned to accept the reality of who and how we are vs lifelong conditioning telling us the opposite. Those feelings are real, even if they are not based in reality. It takes time to undo brainwashing.

 

i see the ambivalent feelings about a threesome as natural. The brain is not equipped to focus on, or do two things at once. Research has exposed that the notion of "multi tasking" is an illusion at best. i think the impetus behind wanting a 3 some can be that one person cannot be everything to one person. Culture has largely developed as monogamous, but i think that is a compromised dynamic where we give some aspects of relationship more weight than others.
A 3 some seems to me to be a way of attempting to have more of our needs/desires met at the same time. I.e., person 1 meets this list of needs/desires, person 2 meets these others. i think some of the conflict, resistance comes in because we cannot give our total focus to person 1 or 2 at the same time, we have to switch back and forth.

Physiologically a males refractory period (the shut down after orgasm) is longer and more intense than a woman's, it's a big difference between the sexes. i find myself wondering if there is more to your fiancé than meets the (current) eye? i wonder if he is as dominant/top oriented as you believe (totally speculating here). To me, the fact that he is attracted to you is maybe telling, and maybe certain parts of him have not surfaced? I.e., he's attracted to a woman who happens to have a dom/top side to her make up.
When i was married to a woman, she and i were both bottom with sub. i often wished and felt we would have connected more if she had some top/dom in her to connect to my bottom/sub parts. It would not have been enough to sustain us, but i think it would have helped.
Now that i am on my own and any relationship i have is gay, i only go for deep intimacy with a Total Top Guy (the lessons have been burned into me). I'm wired total bottom with sub though, which is traditionally associated with the "female role." i do not want or need or like to have an orgasm from having my penis stimulated. Not because it doesn't feel good, it does, but for the reason you identify. i want more to be available, meet the need/desire of the Guy i am with, and a big part of that is "the fire in the eyes" you identify. i want to preserve that for Him (and me), it's a huge part of the symbiotic bond. When i was married and with a woman, i trained my body to never orgasm until she was done. She'd often actually get frustrated after multiple orgasms and i'd know it was time for me to orgasm. For several years, she liked that, but then got to a place where she wished i would just "take her" without regard to her orgasm. Anyway, where i was going is, you could sort of play around with your dynamic between you and your fiancé, he can learn to edge and not orgasm to maintain that "fire in his eyes" and not release till you are... satisfied. The challenge, i am thinking, will be similar to what i had with my wife, part of your 'satisfaction' (for lack of a better term) comes from his orgasm?

me either. For me, sex is an intense, holistic connecting with the person i am with. To me, the more complete the connection, the better. If a person is divided between two, there can only be partial connection and to me that defeats a big part of the purpose.

 

Same.

 

i try to always be clear that my comments are just my perception, i never want to be or come across as absolutist.

Two thoughts on this:
1). While maybe it doesn't feel "ambivalent" (i think ambivalence can be nuanced, and often, much of it unconscious), i think you reveal a divide here. You distinguish between "sex as entertainment" and "making love," (and those would be individually defined and perceived terms... i.e., no standardized meaning except in the most general of terms?) which to me, says something all by itself. Is the making of distinction a sort of coping mechanism (for lack of a better term). As i read it, that would make your experience of "holding her and kissing her while he got her off" "mind blowing" "entertainment." Overall? i think it could be enlightening to explore the reasons behind making the distinction.

2). i'm a nerdy scientist who loves study evidence. But even with that, i eschew absolutism (likely an after effect of processing out of fundamentalist absolutism). To me, the best scientific studies always contain a sort of disclaimer like: "further study is needed." To me, that speaks of an open mind. i've read research on the refractory topic, and there isn't a lot of it... mostly on rats? Who studies rat sexuality? Sounds like these people need to be on EC. Sorry, digressing. Most studies point to males having refractory and females not. More recent stuff suggests both do, but it's different in both sexes. And, it's further complicated by being both physical and psychological..., so refractory period is individual. As you describe your fiancé, my perception of him would be his physical refractory period is shorter than his psychological refractory period... but they are connected.

Re "preference...." i believe, this, along with everything else, is individual. i used to include "sub" in my profiles looking for Guys. i stopped after about 90% of the responses i got were from (what i perceived as) Neanderthals. Not a fair, or appropriately universal conclusion on my part. But hey, it's an emotional response, it doesn't have to be reasonable. i can vouch that there are probably equal numbers of Dom's and subs who want/need stuff like bullying, force, meanness as part of their dynamic. That stuff totally shuts me down. i have a 25 year martial arts history, one guy who tried it while on top of me almost instantly found himself on the bottom wondering what just happened. Another guy almost got back kicked into another state. Both probably thought: "oh, he's definitely not sub." lol, but they would have been wrong.

Your fiancés Dom attributes strike me as what i term: "affectionate Dom." More subtle, and what you describe as "builds up," i think of as seduction and opening. Your hands held above your head reads to me like you found a symbiotic way to access and connect a or some mutual D/s needs/desires.
As you describe you being on top, that doesn't seem to me to be 'domme' from you or 'sub' from him either, any more than receiving a BJ would be. i think a more telling test would be how he'd respond to him receiving something like anal (in any form). Haha, there are other ways subs present and express, but i'm totally wired that way, so my mind naturally goes there. Very un-"professional" of me, very subjective.
At this point, he seems pretty much on the Dom/Top side of the spectrum to me... but i still have a little voice deep inside me that says: "yeah, but he is doing this with a woman who has a domme side to her." i don't see any evidence of that in what you describe in your relationship, but i think most of us can relate to being sideswiped at some point in our life by stuff that was flying under the radar and suddenly it is in our face. i wonder about the possible unconscious attractions?

That strikes me as an astute read of him on your part re the edging. The "two minutes" explanation, as you describe it, sort of reaffirms him being in charge... i.e., he decides when to go that pace and depth and essentially pleasure himself... which self control i perceive as "Dom/Top." So far, i've read of no example in your relationship where you are in control of his climax. For me, one of the hardest parts of learning how to control my own climax when i was married and in the top role, was her climax. It took me awhile to keep my own climax from being triggered by hers. But our dynamic was different. With me, i perceived her climax as a sort of permission to climax myself vs me being in control.
Re your being sated lasting less time than his? You may find this informative?
https://www.verywellhealth.com/refractory-period-7108681

 

i figured... you even used the 'I'm joking' emoji. i still want/ed to clarify my stance, just in general terms. i don't wanna present or come off as an "authority," but just a guy sharing his thoughts, feelings, experience, etc..
Though i am grateful for your affirmation. To me, discussions like this, mutual openness, vulnerability, are the stuff of living, life. Connecting with others on topics that are deeply meaningful to us is, to me, an essence of living.

Lol, yeah, but i was subtle.
Seriously though, i think our ideals and wants of what should be don't always align with what is. Our emotions don't always cooperate. i don't think that's a bad thing though.

Yeah... for me it's a central part of me, that's my primary sex organ. i've been a part of a couple of kink forums that are mostly straight, i've learned there are a lot of straight guys who are into anal, so it's refined my feelings of what constitutes gay. Butt gay or straight, i think it does involves Dom/sub factors, which to me overlaps (intertwines?) with Top/bottom. Infinite points on the spectrum.... There are certainly many other expressions of Gay/Straight... lotta gay guys only do oral, and some do neither anal or oral, yet still identify as "gay." i've encountered top/subs (which totally messes with me).
To me, these are all outer expressions of the inner person, and i see intimacy as a holistic pursuit. I.e., i wanna know the inner person, not just the outer expression. When i read your posts, a part of me wonders about your fiancé's attraction to you? Because, 'domme' is a part of your make up. Which is not to say he is necessarily attracted to that part of you, i just wonder if it's one of those under the radar things? Or not?

But that's me.... i want to know everything about an intimate, not everyone is like that. As a matter of fact, i find it to be rare. i think it's one of the reasons i'm single, i seem to scare guys away, and/or overwhelm them.