I think you are correct overall, but would add some caveats.

Chemistry, real chemistry, is noted more by the female than the male. The woman can sense immunological compatibility within mere moments. The man can, at most, react to ovulation. So in a sexual situation, the male typically reacts to the woman's lead.

Thus it is possible for a woman who is an actress to give every impression of being a fantastic lover to a man with whom she has little or no chemistry.

Certain things can be learned. How to read a man's body language, how to assess his personality, correlations between personality and likes/dislikes, etc.

Some women are able to create an impression of chemistry that will convincingly fool 95% of men; and simultaneously due to being able to read body language and adapt on the fly, be very very good lovers for those men even with little or no real chemistry. Thus the existence of the 9-10 performance GFE provider.

You and some other providers are in a different and entirely honest realm. You and these few providers have the luxury of being able to select clients with whom such chemistry exists, and leave the remaining clients for other providers. This is a very ideal model, but the number of providers who could follow it and still keep a roof over their head is small.

In general, then, I would say you are totally correct. I suck in bed. I KNOW I suck in bed. EXCEPT for with women I genuinely like and who give honest feedback and whose sexual nuances I can learn over time in order to please them. For those women, presumably women with whom there is some degree of genuine chemistry, I don't suck in bed after the 3rd-4th visit. But initially? Or with a woman I don't really like? I suck. Oh boy do I suck. I give it the old college try, of course; but it's like being a bull in a China shop -- I can't do anything right. That's because it isn't genuine. Even with a woman I like, for our first physical contact to be sex is unnatural; and so the sex isn't that good. But as it becomes more natural, more expected, more an extension of how I feel about the person; it becomes better and more enjoyable for her and thus me.

But, in the other direction, a woman who thinks I am Satan incarnate and is a good actress can be one helluva lover. Nature had to give women some advantages to make up for less upper body strength.

We may not be able to learn much in the way of mechanics which make us a 'good lay', but we may definitely learn how to pay attention to our partners and what they appreciate sexually. If we develop a mindset that allows us to consider our partner's needs and desires as well as our own, we are much more likely to become 'good lays' with a larger variety of people.

And, FWIW, the OP should stop trying for the Penthouse Forum prize for fiction.

For me, I figured I was at least a better-than-average lay when a couple of ladies offered intimate time OTC. That was a boost for the old ego after 30 years of monogamy!

I knew I was a good lay when.. I arrived in Hawaii..

I was bestowed with a greeting of flowers around my neck from a hot hawaiian male and a female greeter.: )))
xoxo lorena

you make the same point I was going for with dark quasi neurotic humor. Cheers.

I disagree, and  I'm betting you're response is tainted by the old phrase "a good lay" -- whatever that phase means -- and possibly the caveman like attitude toward sex that was so rampant when that phrase was current. To further my point I'll quote you on yourself

" i feel that for certain men, i am a very intuitive, passionate and highly pleasing sexual partner "

Only knowing you from your posts, I would bet that assessment is accurate. So to use a different phrase and say that "you are a fine lover" would, IMO, be reasonable and probably very true. The fact that there may be certain men with whom you would not click sexually, and who MAY not enjoy themselves with you to the fullest does not detract with who you are as a sexual person.

If the question were posted differnetly, such as

"At what point did you find yourself fully confident as a person who could express and share your sexuality fully, freely, and in such a way as to significantly enhance the sexual experience of you partner?"

... I bet your answer would have been different.

The way my post was written may have influenced what is completely a reader inference, that you allude to in your fisrt sentence. That being, the phrase "a good lay" is related to "techniques" which would be in essence mechanical motions. A bygone era elevated the naive idea that mastery of techniques could make a man a 'stud' or a woman 'a good lay'. By no means do I believe that idea,  nor it it  implied. (I'm old enough to have lived through that era, and fortunately, left those ideas behind long ago.) Using that phrase was just a tongue-in-cheek type of style.

I'll be candid and tell the reason for my post to help explain. I am plain looking at best, I have no physical prowess of any kind, not well endowed,  not even I particularly coordinated. I was a late bloomer: first kiss at 19. Married the girl I lost my virginity to. After my divorce, I was quite nervous about being a single adult male, not having had all the sexual experiences in high-school and college that my friends had. My only sexual experience was in marraige--fullfilling but fairly vanilla.

After divorce I decided to stay single. I was unsure of being able to be a good lover. If a woman has looking for a big strong man to pound her hard nonstop all night (and I found some are) I would not satisfy her. By the way, I'm sure you know there are both men AND women who consider that good sex.  What I thought I MIGHT have to offer was a level of intuitiveness, the ability to read a woman, and a strong desire to have my partner enjoy sex as much or more that I did. (My wife said she thought I was a lesbian trapped inside a man's body, whatever THAT meant!)

Anyway I had some experiences that left me wondering, like the lover who said she was very comfortable with me, but fell asleep DURING sex, the first two and only two times we were together. LOL! It's funny now, but at the time, not so much. Eventually I began seeing the woman I wrote the post about. We had a good connection, and our first time having sex was what I wrote about. The story is true, more importantly, the things I did with her WERE NOT "techniques", I had never aggressively facefucked a woman, nor fisted a woman prior to that. It just happened that way, and the result was off the hook. After that, I became very relaxed and completely confident about having sex. I know now that if the session isn't great, it's not because I can't "deliver the goods", it's just that my partner and I don't click for some reason, and such is life.

So within the bounds of that perspective and invoking a bit of literary license, I know I'm "a good lay." Somehow, I think you are too.



HalfHour