RyanO

Simple 3 Second Technique for Super Sex Orgasm!

Recommended Posts

Hello cat, funny you ask, indeed I have and I'm a fan. It gets into convincing biological/evolutionary theory about how nature has programmed us to not be monogamous, and suggests using Karezza as a way to cultivate the bonding hormone oxytocin instead of the ups and downs of orgasm which leads to feelings of separation (the book is obviously not mainstream and is controversial). Karezza has a lot in common with Taoist sexual practices but also some differences. Obviously a lot can be said about this topic.

 

One guy was having relationship troubles on here, and I advised him to seriously consider if monogamy was right for him (it's culturally expected so some people fall into it whom it may not be right for). If it was, I suggested the book's accompanying site www.reuniting.info, but if not, I also gave a link to a group of people who use evolutionary theory for a different path, pick-up artists, www.fastseduction.com being a popular site.

 

Still, I'm no relationship expert and life is never so black and white.

 

Any particular reason you ask? Are you a fan?

Edited by RyanO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Made you look :P

 

Ah, marketing.

 

I saw!

 

I came!

 

It worked for me!

 

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ha, yes so you know all about it. I asked just because I opened this thread to mention it.. that chasing orgasms might not be the thing, after all.

 

I'm just finishing reading it and am pondering it. I'm kind of amazed that it should be neccesary to tell people that they need to be physically affectionate, as this is a bonding behavior which promotes wellbeing and closeness........well,duh!:blink:

 

 

I have a friend who I think was quite happy being monogamous but whose wife wanted to lead toward polyamory, which is quite threatening to a monogamous person, and after reading that book I think it is because he has a mild form of autism that means he doesnt read signals well, and that actually his wife is craving someone who can 'read ' her, and who doesnt think sex is paint by numbers job.

 

So, yes, ah marketing, which has made people think that orgasm is the pinnacle of meaningful intimate contact. The repercussions are phenomenal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I have a friend who I think was quite happy being monogamous but whose wife wanted to lead toward polyamory, which is quite threatening to a monogamous person, and after reading that book I think it is because he has a mild form of autism that means he doesnt read signals well, and that actually his wife is craving someone who can 'read ' her, and who doesnt think sex is paint by numbers job.

 

 

 

Couldn't she educate him a little into reading signals? Worth the effort I would have thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So, yes, ah marketing, which has made people think that orgasm is the pinnacle of meaningful intimate contact. The repercussions are phenomenal.

 

Indeed. For me, 'spirituality' is very much about finding higher levels of lasting bliss than temporary orgasm. The fact that this also seems to benefit monogamous relationships is compelling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest paul walter

One guy was having relationship troubles on here, and I advised him to seriously consider if monogamy was right for him (it's culturally expected so some people fall into it whom it may not be right for).

 

Perhaps sexual relationships with females were not right for him. Paul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote Cat;

"So, yes, ah marketing, which has made people think that orgasm is the pinnacle of meaningful intimate contact. The repercussions are phenomenal."

 

Hmm..

I agree with drew (if "I got him" right);

more than 5 mutual climaxes and it is True Løøv. So it is

"wise to be careful with *just mechanics*"if you're not ready to handle Love.

goes to say it goes both ways.

from form to formless and from formless to form

 

maagic.. ;) ahh..:wub:

Edited by rain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites