herenow Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 If a gal thinks looks and sex alone are going to get her a man, she'll NEVER be good enough. There are LOTS of good looking women - there will ALWAYS be someone prettier than you - or me - and we all have sex. Well, most of us. You have to think highly of YOU first. The odds of getting that "man" go down considerably when he is married no matter how a woman looks or how much sex she has with said "man".
jj33 Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 Well said Donna. And bravo WS. So much agenda pushing that is not even responsive to the threads...
Lizzie60 Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 I've had tons of both.. and I would have to say that sex, in general, is better with a MM. It has to be the experience I guess... (from earlier years ha-hem).. cause if they come to me.. they are starved.. Most.. I would say ... 90% are sexually starved at home.. they have it maybe 8-10 times a year..
herenow Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 I've had tons of both.. and I would have to say that sex, in general, is better with a MM. It has to be the experience I guess... (from earlier years ha-hem).. cause if they come to me.. they are starved.. Most.. I would say ... 90% are sexually starved at home.. they have it maybe 8-10 times a year.. Well then it's nice they have you to feed them.
Lizzie60 Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 Well then it's nice they have you to feed them. Exactly.. we feed each other..
LucreziaBorgia Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 The times I was involved with 'involved' men were some of the most passionate, wild sex sessions that I have had. It makes sense really. They are trying to overcompensate for what they don't otherwise get (or at the very least get in the same way they had it with me), and the danger adds an edge. It becomes primal when you separate all the emotional stuff from the sexual stuff.
Lizzie60 Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 I agree.. .it is the 'secrecy' of it.. the excitement of the wild sex.. the fear of being caught.. the new stuff (that they don't get at home) like lingerie, kinky sexn toys, new positions, the kissing.. (surprisingly, most couple, after many years, don't frenchkiss anymore)... and I should add. for the OW.. we see them under their best behaviour... we don't get to hear the farts and the snoring., the skid marks.. etc.. etc..
NoIDidn't Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 The times I was involved with 'involved' men were some of the most passionate, wild sex sessions that I have had. It makes sense really. They are trying to overcompensate for what they don't otherwise get (or at the very least get in the same way they had it with me), and the danger adds an edge. It becomes primal when you separate all the emotional stuff from the sexual stuff. I agree. And I don't think it has anything to do with how passionate either of the partners feel. Its risky and edgy. No passionate *love* thing going on when its this primal. Like you said, "when you separate all the emotional stuff".
jj33 Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 That wasnt my experience at all. I saw him under all sorts of circumstances and vice versa. It wasnt best behavior and he wasnt all neat and tidy all the time and neither was I. That was part of the charm. We both spend so much of our lives being "on" that it was nice to be able to just relax around when we were together. Half the time we were both exhausted or running from one place to another all day and by the time the evening came we just wanted to do nothing and hang out and talk. Yes we did have sex and it was great for the most part but that wasnt the focus of the relationship. I wouldnt say it was better than sex with single men on a purely physical level. I dont get really close to a lot of people and there was an emotional closeness between us that I have never experienced with anyone else before that made it better. But it wasnt that rip your clothes off primal abandonment that I have experienced with certain single men. Maybe we are just old?
NoIDidn't Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 Maybe we are just old? LOL! That could be it. I was only 21 back then. LOL.
pkn06002 Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 Can I stay the sex with MW has been the best I have experienced(there have been 2). I see it for this reason, since there is no pretext of a greater relationship everyone is more free with what they WANT to experience or do.
White Flower Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 Do you find that they are better and more experienced than SGs? Hmm, since I was sooooo young the last time I had (experimental sex of any kind) with an SG I'm not sure I can make a proper comparison. Nobody from the past was memorable in any way. I can, however, compare exH to exMM. While exH had a few tricks up his sleeve to overcompensate for his lack of more desirable qualities, MM had all of it. Time was the only problem with MM and you might find that a time constraint can ruin the entire experience. Time constraints aside, we were a perfect match sexually. Time for a cold shower now.
wildsoul Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 Time constraints aside, we were a perfect match sexually. Time for a cold shower now. My experience was that we really had BOTH. The reason the sex was white hot was because we were pefectly sexually matched. We alternated between rough & tumble passion and very intimate emotionally-rich sex. I've found men that are good at one of those OR the other. I know what you mean about primal sex freed of emotions, as I've had that with SG's before. But what was different about xSM is that he's the only one that really could dance with my need for variety that way. I don't think that has anything to do with marital status. It was the chemistry between us. But darn it, I don't need a cold shower like WF. I need a box of kleenex. Remembering all that makes me miss him terribly.
jj33 Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 LOL! That could be it. I was only 21 back then. LOL. Phew. Noone wants to think theyve missed the party;) Not that I am complaining but hey when you are 21 theres a lot about sex that is new and exciting in one way or another...
NoIDidn't Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 Phew. Noone wants to think theyve missed the party;) Not that I am complaining but hey when you are 21 theres a lot about sex that is new and exciting in one way or another... That's the main reason I was laughing about the age comment and my being 21. I was just a baby....what did *I* know? LOL
fooled once Posted April 15, 2009 Posted April 15, 2009 Do you really think a cheating spouse is going to tell the truth about his/her sex live with their spouse? I have never heard of a married person who raved about the sex at home to the person they are cheating with.
Lizzie60 Posted April 15, 2009 Posted April 15, 2009 Do you really think a cheating spouse is going to tell the truth about his/her sex live with their spouse? I have never heard of a married person who raved about the sex at home to the person they are cheating with. If they had so much to rave about.. they wouldn't be out there looking for sex.. would they?
wildsoul Posted April 15, 2009 Posted April 15, 2009 Do you really think a cheating spouse is going to tell the truth about his/her sex live with their spouse? I have never heard of a married person who raved about the sex at home to the person they are cheating with. Nope! And there's never been a cheating spouse who's told the truth about the great sex with the affair person to the betrayed spouse either.
NoIDidn't Posted April 15, 2009 Posted April 15, 2009 If they had so much to rave about.. they wouldn't be out there looking for sex.. would they? This is to simplistic of a statement, for either side. I guess it would apply if sex is all the MP was looking for. But most of the women responding here are in love or were in love with the MP. The sex grew out of mutual attraction - not so much because the MP claimed to not be getting any. I can see it now. A MM propositioning an OW with "would you have sex with me, because my wife won't". LOL. I see a rejection in their future.
GreenEyedLady Posted April 15, 2009 Posted April 15, 2009 OP: In response to your question, I have found that men that have been married previously are better lovers. They realize that their are actually 2 people who should receive pleasure. They are not as selfish as single men who have never been married.
White Flower Posted April 15, 2009 Posted April 15, 2009 OP: In response to your question, I have found that men that have been married previously are better lovers. They realize that their are actually 2 people who should receive pleasure. They are not as selfish as single men who have never been married. Thanks GEL, There is an SG who keeps calling me lately. I'm not sure I'll take his calls anymore.
Trialbyfire Posted April 15, 2009 Posted April 15, 2009 This thread is ridiculous. If it takes a stamp of being married to someone else to make them someone worth sleeping with, there's some screws loose! You're either invested or you're not, unless cheap thrills are your thing...
GreenEyedLady Posted April 15, 2009 Posted April 15, 2009 Thanks GEL, There is an SG who keeps calling me lately. I'm not sure I'll take his calls anymore. Well, if you like him, you could always teach him what you expect.
NoIDidn't Posted April 15, 2009 Posted April 15, 2009 Well, if you like him, you could always teach him what you expect. Its hard to teach selfish lovers anything. They are typically the type that aren't interested in your pleasure. Just their own. I don't blame her for no longer taking his calls.
White Flower Posted April 15, 2009 Posted April 15, 2009 Well mostly I was joking. Every guy deserves a chance to prove himself but already I get the feeling he's not for me.
Recommended Posts