Satisfying the woman in a LTR

I wrote this in another thread in the general forum and I feel this post is more important in here.

In my personal opinion there four main elements and a wild card element when it comes to satisfying a woman and consequently minimizing (nearly eliminating) any chances of she cheating on you (unless she is has some serious mental issues).

The four elements are

• sexual,
• mental,
• emotional, and
• intellectual.

Please see note at the end of post for some clarifications.

The wild card element (as no every woman falls in that category) is spiritual.

In my personal opinion, if you manage to at the very MINIMUM accomplish the following: fully satisfy her in two of the 4 main elements and provide high satisfaction in another element, and are average in the remaining one (as long as this one is NOT the sexual one which should be fully)...then that woman will not cheat on you. She will be in a "blitz state". Heck, she can be in a group of Brad Pitts, and her eyes would always be on you.

On the wild card issue (spiritual). If she is a spiritual woman (if she is not, then problem solved) then you have to be at least one of the three (in addition to the 4 elements stuff I wrote above) in order to keep her fully interested:

1- Spiritual man as both are already spiritual beings

or

2- A man that supports her spirituallity by encouraging her to continue or getting her books or whatever.

or

3- A man that does NOT interfere with her spirituallity (e.g. you give her space so she can do her meditation, etc.). In another words, a man that does not try to stop her from doing this. And the difference between #2 and #3 is that #3 does not even have to "encourage" her as long as he does not "discourage" her and is sensitive about her spiritual needs.

But, here is my caveat...if you make a "bad choice" in women...it will take you CONSIDERABLY much more work to accomplish the above. And at the end you might end up living just for that woman...completely neglecting your life. Becoming literally a slave and unhappy.


Now...if you are lucky and get a woman that some men call the "quality woman" (which is a term that gets thrown all over the place)...you might not need to have her "fully" satisfy in two of the above to manage to keep her from cheating on you. Because a "quality woman" (as defined by most men) would DUMP you before she even considers cheating on you.


Note: Within the context of this thread, mental is more on the "psycological" issue such as feeling safe or knowing you are going to be there for her. Emotional is more about feeling the romance and love and sometimes some little drama. And intellectual is when she can LEARN something different with you like learning from dissimilar hobbies such as rock climbing or music or dancing or books or learning from things that interest her in life which could be the things already mentioned or both learning things together (heck, it could be about learning how you deal with people or about fixing cars or anything that triggers her intellect). Something about sexual element that some men fail to see - if the woman has no or little libido then you are satisfying her by not engaging in a lot of sex (that's why I consider sex compability important - as both having high libidos or both having little/no libido).

Latinoman, I just read your reply in the other forum and I think it's spot on. Really really insightful. This explains why I haven't been cheated on

And that my friend...could actually be my very last post in this place (not by choice, but due to work, etc.).

Take care guys and hopefully I can manage ways to come back here from time to time.

You have a pm before you can leave chief!

Latinoman said:

And that my friend...could actually be my very last post in this place (not by choice, but due to work, etc.).

Take care guys and hopefully I can manage ways to come back here from time to time.

Click to expand...

So your career leads you to a wasteland where there are no computer networks? Must be the UK.

Later bud.

Latinoman said:

Something about sexual element that some men fail to see - if the woman has no or little libido then you are satisfying her by not engaging in a lot of sex (that's why I consider sex compability important - as both having high libidos or both having little/no libido).

Click to expand...

Not to stray too much from your general point, which i happen to like btw, but i wanted to point out to our fellows that "libido" or sex drive is not a static thinig, set in stone, and i dont even recommend someone think that way.

For example, my wife would probably be more than content with sex twice a week, but I've learned if i make that extra effort to be clean, be dressed nice/groomed, be sexual, do some things nice for her that she appreciates by just noticing, etc etc, i can get it almost every night if i wanted. And if i'm coming across sexual to her, then she not only gives in, but she genuinely enjoys it too. I have gone on 7 day strings where I didn't miss a night.

My point is, its not hard to get a woman sexual despite what she believes her sexual drive to be. You can manipulate that a lot, with just a little bit of effort.

This all relates back to woman who you might hear say "I dont like sex that much", or "I could take it or leave it". When you hear that, just smile because you know that really means someone just isn't doing something right.

Azanon

bigjohnson said:

So your career leads you to a wasteland where there are no computer networks? Must be the UK.

Later bud.

Click to expand...

Have computer...but also considerably amount of work and responsibilities. And limited amount of time.

Latinoman, i respect you.. so if i say anything that might be, not respectfull to you.. then i'm sorry!

----

I believe, that those four elements.. are all connected to one eachother!

BUT, the most important...is the first one you wrote!

..................................... and that's exactly why you wrote it!

- faca

Bump.

Great thread, my friend!

EDIT: I think that too many of us on here focus on just not getting played. There is a lot more to it than that (that you said here and in your responses in the other thread). You have to give her the full range of mature masculinity.

I find it interesting you would post this at this time, Latinoman, as I have been journaling about this myself.

I had it a little different in my mind though and will share a modified excert:

... the 4/4 areas of fulfillment I find are necessary to sustain a vibrant mature realtionship:

1. Spiritual compatibility - similar path/journey/process/understanding

2. Intellectual/mental - rhythms and processing of information are similar.

3. Emotional availablity - ability to give and receive love are at similar levels of development and growth.

4. Physical - sexual is very important - but is only part of this.
being able to truly show-up for life and the recognition that love is not only:

...a noun (a "place or space/environment" that the realtionship "lives in")

...an adverb (the word used to described the feeling we are experienceing for/with/in relation to one another)

...Love is a VERB. And in this sense the physical is perhaps the true dealbreaker with many relationships that goes unrecognized.

I think men most readily identify the inability for a woman to act on her love in the bedroom - and we women sense it in other areas that lack decision and action from our men to lead the relationship forward in congruence with the connection shared on the three other levels.

But regardless of the manifestation - the result is the same.

A relationship either grows - or it dies. The first three are the fertile soil - but the fourth is the tending to the plant itself. Inaction kills what had great potential.

... a successful relationship requires a 4/4 level of functioning .


I would add that the element of Physical compatability/needs being met extends way beyond the sex into whether you both are at similar places of being able to follow through with your actions - beyond words and "feelings".

LovelyLady said:

the 4/4 areas of fulfillment I find are necessary to sustain a vibrant mature realtionship:

1. Spiritual compatibility - similar path/journey/process/understanding

2. Intellectual/mental - rhythms and processing of information are similar.

3. Emotional availablity - ability to give and receive love are at similar levels of development and growth.

4. Physical - sexual is very important - but is only part of this.
being able to truly show-up for life and the recognition that love is not only:

Click to expand...

Of these four, which one is the deal-breaker? Meaning, if you had to compromise, which one would destroy the relationship if it weren't present or inadequate?

Rollo Tomassi said:

Of these four, which one is the deal-breaker? Meaning, if you had to compromise, which one would destroy the relationship if it weren't present or inadequate?

Click to expand...

A lot of women actually end up cheating for the reason that the partner they are with does not satisfy all 4. Her primary partner might satisfy her intellectually, emotionally, and spiritually (for example), but then when she really needs a good romp, she calls her pool boy.

Not what I'm driving at.

##17 said:

Great thread, my friend!

EDIT: I think that too many of us on here focus on just not getting played. There is a lot more to it than that (that you said here and in your responses in the other thread). You have to give her the full range of mature masculinity.

Click to expand...

Hi #17!

How are you doing?

Rollo Tomassi said:

Of these four, which one is the deal-breaker? Meaning, if you had to compromise, which one would destroy the relationship if it weren't present or inadequate?

Click to expand...

Very good question.

I understand where you are trying to take this, Rollo.

I would say, Love is a verb, Rollo. (bad bumper sticker, I know - but the prophets don't use rice paper that often anymore )

So I would say the physical.

The choice to not act, or the inability to act, on the compatibility of the first three levels, makes the first three levels highly cherished, but not LTR material. And in essence, a moot point.

When he is a man of action (and when she is a woman of action )- the other areas can be addressed/tended to/nurtured/enriched while remaining as a couple.

I equate inaction as a leaving of the relationship to flounder unattended. Therefore, if either party chooses to exit the relationship rather than stay in it and grow while together - the leaving is an action of sorts - but obviously is not "satisfying the wo(man) in a LTR". This is bearing in mind there are many ways people leave/abandon their responsibilties to a relationship - without actually formally ending it.

And seeing what ACTIONS a Man (or woman) takes tells you the truth of who he is - doesn't it Rollo?

Let me breakdown my take on this list. Honestly, I wish a simple 4 point assessment was all there was to it, but this is your perspective so I'll follow it.

LovelyLady said:

1. Spiritual compatibility - similar path/journey/process/understanding

Click to expand...

I would never pretend to think that a spiritual connection of some kind should be devalued in a relationship. Congruence in belief is certainly a cornerstone, however, it's not a deal breaker. Meaning relationships can and do compromise in this respect. I'm going to relate in the masculine on this one since in my experience it's men who are far more apt to 'convert' to a woman's belief system if the sexual payoff is (at least perceived as) worth the compromise. The obvious example is religion, but, with the exception of the extremely devout, I think men are more willing to shift beliefs in order to secure consistent sex.

I'm sure that will sound like a shallow assessment, but remember that religion is only one aspect of belief. There are countless others where men, generally, wont hesitate to compromise their convictions. I've debated in other threads about how biology trumps conviction and I still stand by this assertion, even if it takes some time or a requisite amount of deprivation to trump that conviction. For every AFC spouting his self-righteous platitudes about the virtues of "quality women", there's another ready to hook up with his one chance to bang that hot piece of ass he's never had a shot at - all the while telling you what a 'special' girl she really is.

LovelyLady said:

2. Intellectual/mental - rhythms and processing of information are similar.

Click to expand...

Again, here the obvious example is in the masculine. How many guys here love to preach the merits of having a woman who can carry on a conversation and be intellectually effective? And I will admit it's an added bonus, but this is like guys asking the "do looks matter?" thread that's so popular on SS. Essentially it comes down to what matters more? A guy with looks and game, or a guy with game, but is a veal-boy? Obviously a woman who's smart AND hot is a better option than an HB9 who's dumb as a sack of hammers. But that's too easy, and this is rarely the case. The real quandary, the one most likely too, is the girl who's chubby and intellectually proficient vs. the piece of ass who's sweet, a bit misguided, but shows intellectual potential if you worked with her. The same is true for guys from the feminine perspective. Which do you think would be the better and more likely compromise? While it is a boon to have both in a prospective mate, it's the hotter, more sexually available person who'll be at the advantage.

Most often we like to assume the binary extremes in debates like this, but the truth is that more often than not, we rarely deal with a binary extreme example. Making decisions between right and wrong are easy, it's decisions between right and right, or wrong and wrong that are tough, and unfortunately are what we face more often. In the end however, we're more likely to forgive a deficit in intellect if the person is good natured, if a bit naive, but looks good and is ready to spread her legs. In contrast, if the same person is fat and/or frigid we're far less likely to compromise.

LovelyLady said:

3. Emotional availablity - ability to give and receive love are at similar levels of development and growth.

Click to expand...

I'll use the feminine for this example, because it's almost a cliché that men are, by default, more emotionally unavailable than women. While I think there may be a grain of truth to this due to simple differences in masculine and feminine biology, I'm sure there are dozens of guys reading this assertion right now thinking "not me, I'm emotionally available, I'm in touch with my feminine,..etc. blah blah" This is because for the past 40 some odd years of societal feminization, guys have been conditioned to think that the more alike they are with the feminine the more they can be set apart from the nebulous "other guys" who aren't - and this of course includes emotional availability.

The problem with comparing levels of emotional availability between the genders is that each sex experiences emotion, and is prompted to that emotion, by different circumstances and in different manifestations. For instance, what might bring a woman to tears may bring a man to an act of violence. The prompt is the same, but the emotion experienced and the behavior manifested as a reaction is different. It is a tragedy of modern social dynamics to expect that men and women's emotional responses should be equal in the same respect as there ought be inter-gender, egalitarian equality in both sexes personality. This is HORSESH!T.

That said, women (and to a greater extent men) will readily compromise emotionally availability in a mate so long as other aspects of the relationship are good. Sex, security provisioning, good prospects for parental investment, and any number of other factors will mitigate this compromise. Emotional availability is NOT a deal breaker. It can certainly be an annoyance, it can certainly be a deficiency that takes a psychological toll, however the very nature of emotional availability still offers some prospect of having it develop into a more mature, more appreciated aspect of a relationship over time. In other words, it's something a woman can work with in a guy.

This is rarely a problem for most women as most guys are AFCs as it is and all too ready to be overly emotionally available. The real problem for men is the emotionally unavailable woman, who's still sexual with him. That guy is trapped in the web. An HB9 who's great in bed, but emotionally resistant is a psychological nightmare, but often her lack of emotion (usually due to an agenda or other issues) isn't enough for him to consider breaking off a relationship for fear of either rejection or getting together with a new woman who doesn't compare physically or sexually to the one he's with.

LovelyLady said:

4. Physical - sexual is very important - but is only part of this.

Click to expand...

This is the deal breaker, but in my pointing it out I run the risk of coming across as "shallow" or "superficial." Even LOVELY LADY, while pointing out it's importance, drops the caveat "but only part of it." It's important, but it shouldn't be that important, right? Wrong. It is THAT important. Sex is the glue that holds relationships together. Sex IS the deal breaker.

If you encountered a woman (or man) who fit every ideal you ever had for a relationship - best friend, loving, 100% loyal, excellent mother/father, came from a great family, perfect HB 10, healthy both mentally and physically, emotionally available, intellectually stimulating, shared all your beliefs - who loved you unconditionally and wanted to marry you, but with one caveat; he/she would NEVER have sex with you under any circumstances, would you marry this person? You could have children together through insemination and they would always be platonically affectionate with you; knowing full well before you did, and pledging to be completely faithful yourself, would you spend the rest of your life in a completely sexless marriage with an otherwise ideal person?

Remember this sexless state doesn't come after having had sex before (due to an injury or disability), it's a pre-condition.

This is how important sex is. People tend to think of love as coming in different varieties and colors - platonic, fraternal, familial, erotic, agape, etc. All of this is nonsense. Love is love, it's how it's expressed that's different. I love my Mom, my brother, my best friend and my daughter, but I only ƒuck my wife - that's what makes us husband and wife. Sex can be an expression of love or it can be an act (recreation) - I happen to have enjoyed both versions in my lifetime - but it is a prerequisite for an intersexual relationship. It's time we all stopped deemphasizing the importance of sex and accept it for what it is. Every time we think we're taking some moral high-road by saying it's superficial or shallow to place such importance on sex, we only do a disservice to ourselves and our lovers. We're only screwing ourselves by thinking that we're in some way above sexuality in some lame self-delusion that stating so will make us more desirable and apart from the rest of the herd (who are also claiming to be above sex anyway) It IS that important, so start giving it the respect it deserves.

...

Re Emotional:

By emotional availabilty - I meant they are not bound to the past. Either through still pining for a former love or so embittered/damaged they cannot emotionally be available to experience a relationship in the present.

I did not mean he and she are to emote in the same way. Nor did I mean they are to emotionally experience things the same way.

Regarding sex:

you may note it was the first thing I wrote because it was the first thing that came to my mind But to think that the man's active leadership is only to be manifested in the bedroom to "Satisfy a woman in a LTR" I think is an incomplete picture.

But let's do talk about sex: great sex comprises more than just intercourse, IMO. Truly, if there is genuine attraction (which is an assumed state of the given relationship, as both parties are in a LTR) and there are "performance issues" (whether the man's or the woman's - as women run into situations where they are not able to "do the deed" biologically for health reasons sometimes, too). There are a myriad of ways to insure that sexual intimacy and satisfaction can still be given and received to the fullest extent of satisfaction possible for both parties - just maybe not in the traditional intercourse people often want to restrict lovemaking to.

If you are talking a lack of desire for the partner - then I would agree that is absolutely a deal breaker - but my presupposition is that within the structure of an LTR that desire has been established.


(Of course I am assuming I am understanding what you are saying :crackup: )