how important is sex in a reltionship?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 12:31 AM GMT
    What is more important sex or compatibility? good sex or good chimestry?
  • TexanMan82

    Posts: 893

    Aug 16, 2008 12:34 AM GMT
    Seems they're all synergistic
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 12:39 AM GMT


    Either/or? No way.

    You have to have both.

    Sex AND compatibility. Both are constantly changing over the years, sometimes hot sometimes cool.

    Does that help?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 12:40 AM GMT
    6 of these, a half dozen of those... how can you really have one without the other?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 12:46 AM GMT


    Hey dancerjack!

    (tips hat, grins)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 12:46 AM GMT
    good day to you sir
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 2:06 AM GMT
    Q(R) : quality of relationship R
    S(R) : sex in relationship R
    E(R) : emotional compatibility in relationship R

    Q(R) = S(R) * E(R)


    If either is zero, then the result is zero.

    Within certain bounds, an abundance of one can make up for a slight lacking of the other; but conversely, a very low value of one counteracts even very high values of the other.

    It should be noted that all of these functions are bounded by an exponential sigmoid squashing function.

    Or at least, that's how I usually think of it.

    ;-)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 2:57 AM GMT
    Both of them. icon_razz.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 3:18 AM GMT
    If the compatiblity is as good as you want it then hopefully the good sex will follow since good sex (in my opinion) is achieved through good communication just like good communication is needed to sustain a good relationship.

    Can you have good sex but no compatibility. Yes.
    Those are usually called One-nighters/Flings. They served a purpose and you got what you wanted I guess even if it was short-lived.

    Can you have good compatiblity and no good sex?. Yes.
    That just means you are mentally capable of stimiulating one another but the sex is lacking.

    You are truly golden when you can achieve both factors.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 3:21 AM GMT
    GregStevensTX saidQ(R) : quality of relationship R
    S(R) : sex in relationship R
    E(R) : emotional compatibility in relationship R

    Q(R) = S(R) * E(R)


    If either is zero, then the result is zero.

    Within certain bounds, an abundance of one can make up for a slight lacking of the other; but conversely, a very low value of one counteracts even very high values of the other.

    It should be noted that all of these functions are bounded by an exponential sigmoid squashing function.

    Or at least, that's how I usually think of it.

    ;-)

    Buddy, you've said it best. All I can do is second you.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 3:25 AM GMT
    GregStevensTX saidQ(R) : quality of relationship R
    S(R) : sex in relationship R
    E(R) : emotional compatibility in relationship R

    Q(R) = S(R) * E(R)


    If either is zero, then the result is zero.

    Within certain bounds, an abundance of one can make up for a slight lacking of the other; but conversely, a very low value of one counteracts even very high values of the other.

    It should be noted that all of these functions are bounded by an exponential sigmoid squashing function.

    Or at least, that's how I usually think of it.

    ;-)

    Jesus Greg.. lol

    That's my mad scientist boyfriend everybodyicon_biggrin.gif..
  • Delivis

    Posts: 2332

    Aug 16, 2008 3:32 AM GMT
    Means very little to me to be honest.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 3:36 AM GMT
    Delivis: Do you mean sex or math means very little to you?

    ;-)
  • Delivis

    Posts: 2332

    Aug 16, 2008 3:38 AM GMT
    Sex. Math on the other hand.....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 3:43 AM GMT
    Outside of a relationship, sex means very little to me. I'm not one of those guys who gets horny and "has to have sex" ... to me that's ridiculous. God gave me hands, an imagination, and a memory for good times past. I don't need to "hook up" to relieve sexual frustration.

    However, in a relationship sex is (psychologically) tied to many other things. I think a healthy sex life is a way of relating to someone you feel intimate with that is important, and when it is lacking it often affects other ways that you relate to one another whether you want it to or not.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 3:54 AM GMT
    I think the formula needs some tweeking:

    Q(R) = [S(R) * E(R)] - [S(OR)*E(M)]

    Where S(OR) is Sex Outside the Relationship and

    E(M) is the Emotional value of Monogamy

    Thus the Q(R) could be 0 or less if your E(M) is equal to the value of E(R) and S(OR) is equal to or greater than S(R).

    However, if you have an open relationship with an E(M) value of Zero - you could have an S(OR) value without dimishing the Q(R).

    -----
    The expansion of the formula is not an advocation or condemnation of any particular conduct.





  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 4:07 AM GMT
    Good point; however, it's worth pointing out for participants i and j in the relationship, you are really talking about

    Qi(R) = [Si(R) * Ei(R)] - [Sj(OR)*Ei(M)]

    That is, S(R) is actually the quality of sex as perceived by i, E(R) is the emotional compatibility as perceived by i, E(M) is the emotional value of monogamy as perceived by i, but S(OR) is the amount of sex that j participates in outside the relationship.

    Some people are hypocritical, after all, and demand monogamy on the part of their partner while being a little more... well, flexible on the issue with respect to themselves.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 4:09 AM GMT

    ...oh my.

    and we've been telling people a good relationship isn't rocket science!icon_redface.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 4:17 AM GMT
    It depends on the libido of you and your partner, but also depends on what you consider sex. I think it has been shown that meaningful touching can actually improve your mental and physical health.

    I could go without sex in a relationship much longer than I could go without touching, hugging, caressing, even laying against each other when watching TV. I am almost overly tactile and get a real big lift out of touching.
  • Nautical

    Posts: 204

    Aug 16, 2008 4:22 AM GMT
    its important but should be in balance with everything else that makes up a relationship.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 4:24 AM GMT
    ActiveAndFit: Well, all you are really saying is that

    S(R) = Σi Q(Ai)

    Or, the total quality of the sex in a relationship is equal to the sum of the quality you get out of each individual sexual act you experience in the relationship. Some people will associate a higher Q value for some sex acts than others....

    For example, for some people Q(butt-sex) > Q(blowjobs), while for others....

    But you probably see what I'm saying. LOL
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 4:43 AM GMT
    GregStevensTX saidActiveAndFit: Well, all you are really saying is that
    S(R) = Σi Q(Ai)
    Boy you sure look like you are having fun with math (and equations) today icon_smile.gif Now I feel like re-reading Mind Tools. Also, though, I was saying that touching can release all kind of natural and powerful mind drugs even outside of an an ejaculatory orgasm. icon_biggrin.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 5:00 AM GMT
    For me, sex is an emotional act so I'm not sure about this one. I guess I have to say that I compatibility, as the definition of good sex is open. As long as I feel a connection and intimacy during sex, it's good for me. An orgasm isn't even necessary for me (bottom), just the feeling of being loved. Plus, chemistry can't be learned, good sex can be at times.

    Good Chemistry for me!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 16, 2008 5:43 AM GMT
    when i was younger, sex was more for fun, it was percieved as "sinfull"icon_twisted.gif...wich of course added to the thrillfactoricon_wink.gif...but as i got older the act initself was more emotional, even spiritual, for ex: kamasutra, tantra...it was also MUCH more satisfying when there was Love involved(not that fulfilling lust doesnt have its satisfactionicon_wink.gif...so i would have to say both love and compatibility are essential to the longevity, and quality of a relationshipicon_biggrin.gif
  • funnyjas03

    Posts: 2

    Aug 16, 2008 3:07 PM GMT
    I'm waiting until I'm married to have sex so no issue here.