ability to divine best sexual positions
David Dalton
for a while thought I had the ability to divine the best
sexual positions for a woman compatible with me. I did
this by fantasizing about the woman (and possibly but
not necessarily masturbating while thinking of her) in
various positions and I would get a rush when thinking
of the best one (or one of the best ones).
But when I e-mailed supposed best positions to a friend
she got mad because her children were reading her e-mail,
and told me to stop e-mailing her and to stay away from
her gigs as well. A few years later I convinced her
that I was now steady and out of my matchmaking phase
and she allowed me back to her gigs and we are now on
pretty good terms (but she has a boyfriend). But because
of that incident I am reluctant to post supposed best
position(s) for anyone by name or even initials.
As that last sentence might indicate, I have moved into
a phase where I again think I can intuit the best
sexual position(s) for a woman compatible with me.
I arrived at that by finding that when I masturbate
in order for me to respond fully I have to now
think of best positions for us to be in. So for
example a certain woman music superstar who I haven't
mentioned before would respond to a lot of variety
(including multiple positions in one sex act) and
69 and foot rubs and threesomes with me and another
woman, especially a certain woman music superstar
who I have already mentioned. But I didn't realize
this until after masturbating thinking of her, and
the result was only a factor 1 orgasm (she was previously
a factor 0). I may try again with my new knowledge.
--
David Dalton dal...@nfld.com http://www.nfld.com/~dalton (home page)
http://www.nfld.com/~dalton/nf.html Newfoundland&Labrador Travel & Music
http://www.nfld.com/~dalton/dtales.html Salmon on the Thorns (mystic page)
"Here I go again...back into the flame" (Sarah McLachlan)
Serene Vannoy
> As that last sentence might indicate, I have moved into
> a phase where I again think I can intuit the best
> sexual position(s) for a woman compatible with me.
> I arrived at that by finding that when I masturbate
> in order for me to respond fully I have to now
> think of best positions for us to be in.
woman and what might be preferable for HER?
Serene
--
http://www.momfoodproject.com
David Dalton
positions and practices to please her.
Serene Vannoy
> In article<9d6f6k...@mid.individual.net>,
> Serene Vannoy<ser...@serenepages.org> wrote:
>
>> On 09/09/2011 03:11 PM, David Dalton wrote:
>>
>>> As that last sentence might indicate, I have moved into
>>> a phase where I again think I can intuit the best
>>> sexual position(s) for a woman compatible with me.
>>> I arrived at that by finding that when I masturbate
>>> in order for me to respond fully I have to now
>>> think of best positions for us to be in.
>>
>> Do you see how your methods of "divination" completely ignore the actual
>> woman and what might be preferable for HER?
>>
>> Serene
>
> No, the divination is aimed entirely at finding the best
> positions and practices to please her.
>
SHE will like. Is that more clear?
Serene
--
http://www.momfoodproject.com
Remus Shepherd
> On 09/12/2011 08:27 AM, David Dalton wrote:
> >> Do you see how your methods of "divination" completely ignore the actual
> >> woman and what might be preferable for HER?
> >
> > positions and practices to please her.
> >
> How well YOU orgasm while THINKING of her does NOTHING to ascertain what
> SHE will like. Is that more clear?
positions I feel like doing for that encounter. As long as I mix it up
I'm almost certain to discover one that she likes, and then we stick with
that one. :)
Of course, this doesn't help if your partner is imaginary.
... ...
Remus Shepherd <re...@panix.com>
New Webcomic: Genocide Man http://www.genocideman.com/
Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass slaughter can be hilarious.
David Dalton
hasn't shown up so I am resubmitting it with minor changes.
The code of the original version was "44uPFGj1PqUfmJ20VF7D4A".
In article <9d84co...@mid.individual.net>,
Serene Vannoy <ser...@serenepages.org> wrote:
> On 09/12/2011 08:27 AM, David Dalton wrote:
> > In article<9d6f6k...@mid.individual.net>,
> > Serene Vannoy<ser...@serenepages.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On 09/09/2011 03:11 PM, David Dalton wrote:
> >>
> >>> As that last sentence might indicate, I have moved into
> >>> a phase where I again think I can intuit the best
> >>> sexual position(s) for a woman compatible with me.
> >>> I arrived at that by finding that when I masturbate
> >>> in order for me to respond fully I have to now
> >>> think of best positions for us to be in.
> >>
> >> Do you see how your methods of "divination" completely ignore the actual
> >> woman and what might be preferable for HER?
> >>
> >> Serene
> >
> > No, the divination is aimed entirely at finding the best
> > positions and practices to please her.
> >
>
> How well YOU orgasm while THINKING of her does NOTHING to ascertain what
> SHE will like. Is that more clear?
The divination is not based on how well I orgasm.
In fact the divination does not require me to
masturbate or even get an erection.
It is based on my roaming through in my mind various
sexual positions and practices while thinking of a
woman and at the supposed best positions and practices
I get a perineum click and kundalini buzz. If this
works it is, like any form of divination, magical.
It is a magical method of determining what she will
like. However I doubt it is working. I guess I
could test it on a woman compatible with me (again
I speculate that is bisexual women who have had
some orgasms) who knows at least some of what she likes.
But also above I know I said "in order for me to respond fully
I have to now think of best positions for us to be
in". By that I meant I now don't get a full erection
until I think of the best positions and practices.
But this response by me is not the aim of the
divination; the aim of the divination is to find the
best sexual positions and practices for her.
And again I don't have to even get an erection to
do the divination but it seems now to get an erection
I have to do the divination.
But I doubt such divination is working and in practice
as Remus said it is good to try a few positions and
settle on the one(s) that work for her. And in my
case I am 47 years old so most women I would have
sex with would already know the best positions for
them.
But divination results I got for a certain superstar
actress are:
1. she would like to have sex in a bath or hot tub
2. she would like a lover who is talkative during sex
3. she would like to tie up her man
David Dalton
> The divination is not based on how well I orgasm.
> In fact the divination does not require me to
> masturbate or even get an erection.
>
> It is based on my roaming through in my mind various
> sexual positions and practices while thinking of a
> woman and at the supposed best positions and practices
> I get a perineum click and kundalini buzz. If this
> works it is, like any form of divination, magical.
> It is a magical method of determining what she will
> like. However I doubt it is working. I guess I
> could test it on a woman compatible with me (again
> I speculate that is bisexual women who have had
> some orgasms) who knows at least some of what she likes.
>
> But also above I know I said "in order for me to respond fully
> I have to now think of best positions for us to be
> in". By that I meant I now don't get a full erection
> until I think of the best positions and practices.
> But this response by me is not the aim of the
> divination; the aim of the divination is to find the
> best sexual positions and practices for her.
> And again I don't have to even get an erection to
> do the divination but it seems now to get an erection
> I have to do the divination.
sure I can get an erection without doing the divination.
> But I doubt such divination is working and in practice
> as Remus said it is good to try a few positions and
> settle on the one(s) that work for her. And in my
> case I am 47 years old so most women I would have
> sex with would already know the best positions for
> them.
David Dalton
Zed Pobre <z...@resonant.org> wrote:
> David Dalton <dal...@nfld.com> wrote:
> > It is a magical method of determining what she will
> > like. However I doubt it is working.
>
> anything that directs your attention inwards (and this style of magic
> falls very solidly in that category), rather than outwards, is
> unlikely to be useful in bed, and in fact rather flags you as someone
> likely to be self-absorbed and not much fun. In addition, magic in
> particular has been consistently shown to be an absolutely unreliable
> method for doing anything. A graph explaining this further can be
> found at:
>
> https://www.xkcd.com/373/
>
> An amazingly reliable method, on the other hand, is to *ask your
> partner* and *pay attention to your partner in bed*. It breaks down
> only when you have a lousy relationship where one side lies to the
> other, though shy partners may require a lot more patience.
>
> (Am I the only one that thinks that part of the fun is in the
> experimenting, anyway?)
>
> > But divination results I got for a certain superstar
> > actress are:
> >
> > 1. she would like to have sex in a bath or hot tub
> > 2. she would like a lover who is talkative during sex
> > 3. she would like to tie up her man
>
> imagination, as long as you keep confusing what it produces with
> reality you are going to encounter many problems in life, one of the
> least of which is in getting people to take you seriously in
> conversation.
I agree that probably my divination method is not working
and is not a substitute for experimentation and listening
to my partner. But you say that in my divination my
attention is inwards when really my attention is mostly
outwards and on the woman in question.
But barring experimental evidence backing my divination
method I don't expect any of you to take my divination
claims seriously, and I tend to doubt that it is working
myself. So unless there is another followup that needs
a reply from me, that is all I have to say in this
thread.
Serene Vannoy
>> like. However I doubt it is working.
>
> anything that directs your attention inwards (and this style of magic
> falls very solidly in that category), rather than outwards, is
> unlikely to be useful in bed, and in fact rather flags you as someone
> likely to be self-absorbed and not much fun.
That wasn't at all what I was trying to get across, but it's also an
excellent point.
> In addition, magic in
> particular has been consistently shown to be an absolutely unreliable
> method for doing anything. A graph explaining this further can be
> found at:
>
> https://www.xkcd.com/373/
Exactly. And extra geek points for using xkcd in an argument.
>
> An amazingly reliable method, on the other hand, is to *ask your
> partner* and *pay attention to your partner in bed*. It breaks down
> only when you have a lousy relationship where one side lies to the
> other, though shy partners may require a lot more patience.
>
> (Am I the only one that thinks that part of the fun is in the
> experimenting, anyway?)
Again, this exactly.
>
>
>> But divination results I got for a certain superstar
>> actress are:
>>
>> 1. she would like to have sex in a bath or hot tub
>> 2. she would like a lover who is talkative during sex
>> 3. she would like to tie up her man
>
> While there's nothing inherently wrong with an active fantasy
> imagination, as long as you keep confusing what it produces with
> reality you are going to encounter many problems in life, one of the
> least of which is in getting people to take you seriously in
> conversation.
Right. And in getting people to believe you actually care about them as
people, rather than as sex toys for your own amusement and pleasure.
Serene
Serene Vannoy
> I agree that probably my divination method is not working
> and is not a substitute for experimentation and listening
> to my partner.
Then it's not a divination method; it's fantasizing. Which is fine; just
don't confuse the two.
> But you say that in my divination my
> attention is inwards when really my attention is mostly
> outwards and on the woman in question.
NO. It's on your *imagined conception* of the woman in question. It's
entirely in your head. You haven't slept with the woman or asked her
what she'd like in bed, so you know NOTHING about her and aren't
focusing on her, but on YOUR IDEAS of her.
> But barring experimental evidence backing my divination
> method I don't expect any of you to take my divination
> claims seriously,
Oh, good. Then stop making them.
Serene
--
http://www.momfoodproject.com
Orlando Enrique Fiol
>And in getting people to believe you actually care about them as
>people, rather than as sex toys for your own amusement and pleasure.
I don't understand why sex can't be an integral part of caring about someone as
a human being. After all, sex is part of humanity. Why do so many women expect
interest to be proven first nonsexually and then sexually under their strict
control?
Orlando
Serene Vannoy
>>
>> That wasn't at all what I was trying to get across, but it's also an
>> excellent point.
>
No worries. I really enjoyed your post.
ObSex: Got laid last night. It doesn't happen as often as it used to,
but it's sure nice.
Serene
--
http://www.momfoodproject.com