Sexual Compatability

[Bootstrap]

Following God does cost something but each spouse satisfying each other sexual needs is biblical we are not to be denying each other sexually. I think alot of people on here like to cherry pick which scripture to read.

I agree that cherry-picking Scripture is bad, so let's take a look at the passage in 1 Corinthians 7 to which you allude:

1 Cor 7:1 Now for the matters you wrote about: "It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman." 2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband. 3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7 I wish that all of you were as I am. But each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.

This passage clearly says that:

1. Husbands and wives should have sex with each other
2. If you deprive each other of sex it should be by mutual consent
3. Husbands and wives should yield their bodies to each other

This is not a terribly romantic passage - and this is in fact part of the only passage where Paul says he is not speaking on God's authority. The reason Paul gives for sex here is not the same reason Jesus gives or that Genesis gives, he says to have sex with your spouse to avoid sexual immorality.

But what this passage does not say, I don't think, is that husbands or wives need to perform any particular sex act, even if it seems repulsive. To me, the attitude of not having authority over your own body, and yielding it to another, means to have utmost consideration for the other.

Incidentally, there's a big difference between saying (1) the husband and wife should each yield to the other, versus (2) the husband and wife should each demand that the other yield to them.

Jonathan

 

[eatenbylocusts]

If you are squeeky clean the risk is pretty low no more risk than a man giving a woman oral sex.

This is not true. Squeaky clean visually isn't the same as free from disease-producing organisms. E. coli can be present even if there is not stool sitting there. I have said this before when you've brought it up in other threads and I have never seen you respond. E. coli lives in the rectum. E. coli can make people very sick. Women can give themselves nasty infections when they wipe back to front. Hepatitis A can be spread through stool. Have you been checked for that before putting your wife at risk?
You can't even compare a rectum to a vagina. We naturally have some bacteria on our skin and in the vagina, but they aren't harmful like the stuff living in the rectum.

 

[Beauty4Ashes]

i aint lickin no ones butt

 

[JCFantasy23]

For some reason I always feel strange and [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]tish talking about sex like this in a Christian forum lol. Wrong of me I know, but...

Anyway, yes, from my perspective there are several factors that weigh in.

One is chemistry. Sometimes you just don't have it. If you explore sex with someone you think feels like a brother or friend, it will never be mind-blowing.

There are also so many personality traits when it comes to sex. Some are more naturally passive/submissive, some or more dominant and like control. Some are selfish lovers, some liking giving and return, some like giving to the point where you almost feel like they WANT to be ignored and this makes you ultimately unsatisfied. Some like it rough and fast, some are into kink, some really don't have a high sex drive - others do. You'd be amazed how much it can matter if one person is severely a morning-wood type person and the other only gets in the mood at night!

Yes, everyone can have sex with the right parts, but a lot of that won't result in GOOD sex.

 

[Godzila]

Deny yourselves and to each other.

 

[JCFantasy23]

Deny yourselves and to each other.

Godzila,
Are you referring to my last post or just posting in general?

 

[Godzila]

i'm not referring to anyone

 

[GQ Chris]

Sexual compatibility is important, if your partner is regularly a dog in heat, and you're about as Hot as the icebox, you both will be frustrated.

 

[unkern]

Life is not about sex its about God. Do not practice sexual immorality

 

[JCFantasy23]

i'm not referring to anyone

Ah, good, because I was confused anyway

 

[rppearso]

Sexual compatibility is important, if your partner is regularly a dog in heat, and you're about as Hot as the icebox, you both will be frustrated.

I agree and this frustration can regularly lead to divorce. People can lash out in self rithousness but when they get angry at the motorist in front of them its all the same, I do not know why people give this subject special scrutiny, I think its rather hypocritical.

 

[white dove]

i aint lickin no ones butt

*Bump*

 

[Rajni]

Thought I'd throw in a very unpopular perspective on this issue:

Regarding the 1 Corinthians passage mentioned earlier:

1 Cor 7:1 Now for the matters you wrote about: "It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman." 2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband. 3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7 I wish that all of you were as I am. But each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.
​

It seems that, especially in the more fundamentalist Christian camps, the general rule for wives is that they cooperate in the sex department or else. In the past I've seen the above passage provided to "prove" this point, with verse 6 either eliminated or glossed over. But Paul wraps up his statements by clarifying that he's not commanding it. Sex is not mandatory in a marriage. And, on an individual level, it's not a "need". Food, clothing, shelter ... those are needs. Sex -- on the individual level -- is not.

Indeed, if sex were the relational super-glue that it's commonly made out to be, there'd be no such thing as a one-stand; everyone, without exception, would remain with their first partner for life.



.


.

 

[invisiblebabe]

I've been dating someone for over 2 years now, and there's a lot of chemistry. We don't have to have sex to know that. But I do think it would be pretty much impossible to know without kissing and making out.

I disagree Just talking with someone and standing physically close to him was enough for me to determine whether I had chemistry with him. It was very easy for me to tell whether someone's personality was compatible with mine (which is important w/sexuality - if I didn't genuinely like someone and click with him on an intellectual or emotional level, I didn't expect the physical level to be too great) and whether I found him physically attractive (this was fairly easy to tell). Maybe I'm weird, but it worked for me...

I waited to kiss on the lips until I was engaged to my now husband. I knew there was plenty of chemistry between us from the first time we met. We've been married nearly 3 years now, and I was most definitely right.

 

[bliz]

There is no such thing as sexual compatibility.

All sexual activity is learned. We can learn to kiss in different ways. We can learn to wait for sex. We can learn to have sex more frequently than we might desire. We can learn to respond to different stimulation. All of this requires trust and communication and an awareness of our sexuality and all of that helps build the relationship, helps build the marriage.

I've been married for 30 years. We have not had the same kind of sex over and over again for 30 years! Lots of variety, lots of practice and lots of honest talking and experimenting.

 

[exxxys]

I'm going to be a bit explicit here in my examples, so skip over if you're sensitive.

Ok. There are many different areas of interests in the fields of sex. Two different people may be into totally different things. For example: I like being held down, and my boyfriend likes being bitten. (Not down there!!! Oh gosh!)

People who like different things are going to get into conflicts over what to do in bed. This can eventually lead to a breakup. Sex is important.

 

[SiyoNqoba]

People who like different things are going to get into conflicts over what to do in bed. This can eventually lead to a breakup. Sex is important.

That's why it's important to have an open and understanding relationship. Liking different things is of course going to be a problem if niether person is willing to discuss it.

I think that bliz has the best insight that I have read so far. I guess having been married for 30 years really helps you to know what you're talking about

 

[Bootstrap]

I disagree Just talking with someone and standing physically close to him was enough for me to determine whether I had chemistry with him. It was very easy for me to tell whether someone's personality was compatible with mine (which is important w/sexuality - if I didn't genuinely like someone and click with him on an intellectual or emotional level, I didn't expect the physical level to be too great) and whether I found him physically attractive (this was fairly easy to tell). Maybe I'm weird, but it worked for me...

I waited to kiss on the lips until I was engaged to my now husband. I knew there was plenty of chemistry between us from the first time we met. We've been married nearly 3 years now, and I was most definitely right.

I'm glad that worked out well for you!

I was younger when I first married, and I had never dated anyone else, and I knew a lot less about people than I do now. But I was very much in love, I thought there would be chemistry, and there wasn't. After 23 years of a mostly sexless marriage, my ex decided she is lesbian and left me.

In retrospect, I wish I hadn't married the first person I dated, I wish I had had experience kissing more than one woman to get a feeling for what chemistry feels like, I wish I had dated for at least 2 years before making decisions about marriage. It would probably have saved both of us years of pain.

Jonathan

 

[Bootstrap]

That's why it's important to have an open and understanding relationship. Liking different things is of course going to be a problem if niether person is willing to discuss it.

And what you like may change over time. An understanding relationship can handle that.

Jonathan

 

[rppearso]

Thought I'd throw in a very unpopular perspective on this issue:

Regarding the 1 Corinthians passage mentioned earlier:

1 Cor 7:1 Now for the matters you wrote about: "It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman." 2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband. 3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7 I wish that all of you were as I am. But each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.
​

It seems that, especially in the more fundamentalist Christian camps, the general rule for wives is that they cooperate in the sex department or else. In the past I've seen the above passage provided to "prove" this point, with verse 6 either eliminated or glossed over. But Paul wraps up his statements by clarifying that he's not commanding it. Sex is not mandatory in a marriage. And, on an individual level, it's not a "need". Food, clothing, shelter ... those are needs. Sex -- on the individual level -- is not.

Indeed, if sex were the relational super-glue that it's commonly made out to be, there'd be no such thing as a one-stand; everyone, without exception, would remain with their first partner for life.



.


.

Nobody has to do anything but see how happy or how long your marriage will last if you decide sex is not a priority or if you snub your partner at things they like sexually some people may suffer with it for 23 years like bootstrap and others may call BS after 6 months to a year, and what do you mean by "or else", or else your husband will kill you, not likely, he will probably leave but you dont "need" a husband just like your husband does not "need" sex right, so what does it matter? If sex were not a need people would go after it like they do food or water, I agree its not a need for your physical body to live for the day but its been proven sex dramaticly reduces your chances of prostate cancer so I would say sex is a need just like vitamins or minerals, I dont have to get all my iorn in any given day but if I do that long enough it will kill me.

You can either be a person that is bitter all the time and a man hater or you can be positive and do things to make your life better. If you dont want to be sexual then why get married, just to have the tax write off?