New question, sexual in nature.

[ML]

If she is in to you, and you are in to her, sex will usually be good.

I cannot agree with this statement.

Some women are simply terrible at sex, and no amount of effort or training will ever change her.  Of course, the same can be said for some men.

Also, there can be cases where both the man and woman are good at sex (with most other partners), but together they are not good.

For those who think that sex with most anyone (where both parties are 'in to each other') will be good; then I would submit that they really have not had truly great sex.  

There is a world of difference between standard result sex and mind blowing sex.

However, there is a serious downside to experiencing truly great sex.  You can guess at what this downside is.

[Daveman]

Before a face to face meeting, I don't believe you can ask or expect any answers from any woman about anything sexual.  This is really unfortunate as it leads to a lot of wasted time for both parties, but it is just a fact when dealing with women.

However, I have found some success (that is in determining a woman's level of sex drive in general) by exchanging jokes.  Start with some minor sex jokes and see how she reacts.  She may either send you some similar jokes back, or she may completely ignore  your jokes.  If she does send you some sex jokes back, you can up the ante a bit and see where it leads.  I have found that to be a pretty accurate meter as to what is going to happen when you meet.

But direct questions about sex . . . that doesn't ever go over well; again, it is unfortunate but true.

I think it is all in the level of reciprocal interest and the approach and perhaps being comfortable yourself in speaking about it.  To me it's not a big deal to talk about sex, as it's as natural as anything else in relations and life so perhaps women feel at ease speaking with me about it.  

I mentioned that it is a hit or miss because it has been stated many times that RW will not speak about sex prior to meeting but my experience has been exactly the opposite.  We have spoken about many/all topics prior to meeting.  Now, perhaps the difference lies in that all my trips have been of the VO variety.  I have no idea.

I think it really has to do with how comfortable one is with ones self when one is communicating with a woman.  If you're not, they can sense/feel it, and if you are, they tend to relax and open up about any topic.  

[I/O]

That is your assessment of every unmarried poster's chances.

Are you aware accuracy and credibility tend to go hand in hand?

[ML]

I think . . . perhaps being comfortable yourself in speaking about it.  To me it's not a big deal to talk about sex, as it's as natural as anything else in relations and life so perhaps women feel at ease speaking with me about it.  

I think it really has to do with how comfortable one is with ones self when one is communicating with a woman.  If you're not, they can sense/feel it, and if you are, they tend to relax and open up about any topic.  

Sounds like a good analysis in general.  But in my case, it does not fit.  I am extremely comfortable talking about sex; and I am extremely comfortable talking with women.  And, I have great talks with women about sex . . . after the first event.

But before a face to face meeting . . . I have found that NONE of them will talk  about it;  except as jokes.

So our experience is just different.

[vwrw]

There have been plenty of responses from people who understand my question just fine. If you don't understand my question or where I'm coming from, feel free to not reply.

Your question is whether FSU women are more satisfying while performing sexual acts than your local women.

Gator has given you a valid and sound answer that “experts” here neither have explored a statistically representative sample nor  they have necessary qualifications to draw reliable conclusions about whether a significant difference in sexual performance of RW vs. AW exists.

[vwrw]

Supposedly the guy in the story currently has a Russian wife. He went to Russia about three years ago for about three weeks and apparently got to "point out" women that he liked and "try them out", if you will. He found one he liked, brought her home, and the rest is history. Now obviously this story sounds a bit out there to me.

Words that a person uses to convey her or his message reveal the person's attitude toward the subject in question.  Ignorance that is not accompanied by prejudice toward a subject matter entails neutral attitude toward the subject. Your terms indicate a negative attitude toward a large group of women about whom you know nothing.  Since it is logical to assume that you harbor prejudice about FSU women, and the content of your prejudice is likely to be that FSU women are easy and you can point out and try out anyone as if they were shores arranged in a  line in front of you for your selection.

Reading signs you exhibit, my tentative view is that your psyche is flawed, not local women. And that makes your sexual experience unsatisfactory. Heal your psyche and your perception will change. 

[Misha]

Your question is whether FSU women are more satisfying while performing sexual acts than your local women.

Gator has given you a valid and sound answer that “experts” here neither have explored a statistically representative sample

A statistically representative sample with a 3% margin of error would required roughly 1,100 women in the United Stated and an additional 1,100 women in the FSU. In theory, it could be done. It would require, of course, exploring the issue of sexual performance with any woman picked at random no matter what she looked like  :evil:

The challenge would be to come up with quantifiable measures of sexual performance to ensure that there is no researcher bias being introduced into the research, bias that would undermine the results even with a representative sample 

[Daveman]

Sounds like a good analysis in general.  But in my case, it does not fit.  I am extremely comfortable talking about sex; and I am extremely comfortable talking with women.  And, I have great talks with women about sex . . . after the first event.

But before a face to face meeting . . . I have found that NONE of them will talk  about it;  except as jokes.

So our experience is just different.

Indeed. It's interesting to speculate. I wonder if the difference would lie in the personality types of the ladies of whom we are attracted.  I'm attracted to very positive, playful, open, upbeat, a tad silly, a bit giggly and outgoing, yet very passionate about life in general (what woman isn't? Well, many are over serious sticks in the mud... aloof, closed, ridiculously suspicious, etc etc).  I spend about 5 seconds with those in the latter category and I'm done and gone).

So, perhaps mine have all been playfully passionate closet sex fiends from the lineup that weren't picked in the first round of the Point and Boink draft! LoL.. hey, no complaints from me... but maybe the personality of the woman has everything to do with it, but i refuse to publicly admit that and adhere to my fantasy that it's my scintillating wit and inane.. er.. no, my innate irresistible charm!

[Daveman]

A statistically representative sample with a 3% margin of error would required roughly 1,100 women in the United Stated and an additional 1,100 women in the FSU. In theory, it could be done. It would require, of course, exploring the issue of sexual performance with any woman picked at random no matter what she looked like  :evil:

The challenge would be to come up with quantifiable measures of sexual performance to ensure that there is no researcher bias being introduced into the research, bias that would undermine the results even with a representative sample 

I'm in!! 

[ML]

A statistically representative sample with a 3% margin of error would required roughly 1,100 women in the United Stated and an additional 1,100 women in the FSU.

Are you sure?

It has been a while since  my statistics courses; however, I seem to recall that with sample size of around 30 (provided they are random) the student t distribution is a good approximation  of the normal distribution and inferences can  be made at the 10%, 5% and 1% confidence  levels.

[ML]

Indeed. It's interesting to speculate. I wonder if the difference would lie in the personality types of the ladies of whom we are attracted.  I'm attracted to very positive, playful, open, upbeat, a tad silly, a bit giggly and outgoing, yet very passionate about life in general (what woman isn't? Well, many are over serious sticks in the mud... aloof, closed, ridiculously suspicious, etc etc).  I spend about 5 seconds with those in the latter category and I'm done and gone).

Nope, this does not explain our different experience . . . as I choose the very same type woman as you.

[BC]

Are you sure?

It has been a while since  my statistics courses; however, I seem to recall that with sample size of around 30 (provided they are random) the student t distribution is a good approximation  of the normal distribution and inferences can  be made at the 10%, 5% and 1% confidence  levels.

Of course, the more the merrier..

[Misha]

Are you sure?

Yes. There are many online margin of error calculators. Here is one: http://www.marketingcounsel.com/tools/margin_of_error_calculator2.htm

It has been a while since  my statistics courses; however, I seem to recall that with sample size of around 30 (provided they are random) the student t distribution is a good approximation  of the normal distribution and inferences can  be made at the 10%, 5% and 1% confidence  levels.

I was using a 95% confidence level (i.e. the margin of error will be correct 19 times out of 20). For a higher confidence level (correct 99 times out of 100), you would need an even larger sample.

A sample size of 30, would give you roughly an 18% margin of error, assuming a female population of at least 100,000,000 in the United States over the age of 18.

[ML]

Reading signs you exhibit, my tentative view is that your psyche is flawed, not local women. And that makes your sexual experience unsatisfactory. Heal your psyche and your perception will change. 

VWRW, you generally have some very good insights, display a sharp mind, and have ever improving writing skills.

However, in this case I think you are being overly harsh on the OP.

It appears here that you are taking the course of "protect and defend my fellow females at any cost" and "attack the man who dares raise such issues."

[fabiodriven]

Words that a person uses to convey her or his message reveal the person's attitude toward the subject in question.  Ignorance that is not accompanied by prejudice toward a subject matter entails neutral attitude toward the subject. Your terms indicate a negative attitude toward a large group of women about whom you know nothing.  Since it is logical to assume that you harbor prejudice about FSU women, and the content of your prejudice is likely to be that FSU women are easy and you can point out and try out anyone as if they were shores arranged in a  line in front of you for your selection.

Reading signs you exhibit, my tentative view is that your psyche is flawed, not local women. And that makes your sexual experience unsatisfactory. Heal your psyche and your perception will change.  

Clearly you missed it when I said this right before the quote you chose-

"Here's a "friend of a friend" story I just heard. Please bear in mind I take little heed in friend of friend stories or anything of that nature from people who have nothing to do with this subject other than having a friend who has married a Russian woman."

And never once did I ask whether or not Russian are better in bed than the local women here. I have no idea where you got that.

[Misha]

I'm in!! 

You might not be if you saw some of the women that a totally random sample of women might generate  Statistically speaking, for every "10" you would be just as likely to get a "1" with of course the majority being of average age and looks.

[SANDRO43]

Of course, the more the merrier..

The Sultans had figured that out centuries ago :

[Daveman]

You might not be if you saw some of the women that a totally random sample of women might generate  Statistically speaking, for every "10" you would be just as likely to get a "1" with of course the majority being of average age and looks.

LoL.. isn't that why god invented beer/wine?  The more she drinks the more handsome I become... however, the BBW craze is a bit too scary for beer or even hard liquor.. I may need to borrow the bong for a while...

[TheTraveler]

But realistically, I would like to find out if my new wife and I are going to be compatible. I have been with women who seemed like they would be right up my alley when talking to them before hand. When the time actually comes, it's almost always a disappointment to me.

Do you want to find a girl who is great in bed due to her prior sexual experience with others?... or because of what she and you have learned together?

Because your quest would seem to inevitably favor girls who have had a lot of prior experience and perhaps with a lot of partners.

Also, you seem to be focused on re-creating that part of your marriage that worked... But have you put much priority into identifying and eliminating the negative things from your prior marriage?... Those things that might otherwise cause your future relationship to suffer the same fate?

[vwrw]

And never once did I ask whether or not Russian are better in bed than the local women here. I have no idea where you got that.

I inferred that by decoding, interpreting, and summarizing your post. First, title of your thread expressly states that your question is about sex. Second, your post emphasizes that your satisfaction with sex is viewed as a colossal criterion for determining compatibility between you and a woman. Third, your experience of attempting to learn whether you are compatible with a woman through conversations with her has been a failure. All those points indicate that you conceived with idea to ask question about sex and learn opinions of “experts” whether FSU women are sexually more satisfying and whether local “experts” agree with your impression (which was acquired through listening to friends) that a man can "point out" FSU women that he likes and "try them out" .

[facetrock]

  Fabio, the first thing you have to do is completly get over your ex-wife. I dont think your there yet. You will never have a good relationship until you stop comparing other women to your ex. Its not easy and it does take time. Good luck.

[fabiodriven]

I inferred that by decoding, interpreting, and summarizing your post.

You may want to change the batteries in your crystal ball...

[vwrw]

It appears here that you are taking the course of "protect and defend my fellow females at any cost" and "attack the man who dares raise such issues."

I protect and defend not females but the conception that the majority of people are endowed with or have satisfactory mastered natural or normal abilities. The ability to sexually satisfy a man is natural or normal for women and thus, the majority of women are able to perform that on a satisfactory level. When a person raises an issue claiming that the majority is impaired in some way, I tend to assume that the claimer is the impaired one.

[vwrw]

You may want to change the batteries in your crystal ball...

LOL!
To your information, it has been a while as scientists have been insisting that existence of cognitive functions is attributable to brain cells not a crystal ball. Anyway, thanks for your consideration about my needs.

[Shadow]

I cannot agree with this statement.

Some women are simply terrible at sex, and no amount of effort or training will ever change her.  Of course, the same can be said for some men.

Also, there can be cases where both the man and woman are good at sex (with most other partners), but together they are not good.

For those who think that sex with most anyone (where both parties are 'in to each other') will be good; then I would submit that they really have not had truly great sex.  

There is a world of difference between standard result sex and mind blowing sex.

However, there is a serious downside to experiencing truly great sex.  You can guess at what this downside is.

It seems you are misreading my statement. The secret to have great sex lies in emotional involvement, not in technical issues. Regardless of how many or which technical parts you mastered, without a relationship it is meaningless and you will not reach the 'mind blowing' level.

If there is emotional involvement, it becomes a natural thing to satisfy each other. Without that, its just going through the motions.