If you are "object oriented" you are able to be turned on by "objectifying" your sexual partner. There is a negative connotation associated with the phrase "sex object" but all that is really going on is that you are being sexually aroused due to stimulation to a certain part of the brain due to, usually, visual images. Men are generally more object-oriented than women because that's just how their brains work. Most women most of the time aren't as object -oriented. They need more context. I am pretty high drive but I am not sexually aroused by looking at pictures of penises. During my brief foray into the world of AFF, I chatted a bit with one of the headless penis guys (just curious). His pictures were quite impressive but they did not turn me on at all UNTIL he started typing some fairly intelligent sexy stuff at me and then it was like the penis actually had a personality attached to it and looking at the picture did start to turn me on because I started thinking about what the penis might "Do" to "Me"(then he ruined it by using the phrase "glistening jewel" -Blech!. If you're going to go around being a headless penis guy you really need to do a little better than that.) Anyway, my point is that I think you are expecting your wife to be too much like a man in her sexuality. She is not going to love your penis or even appreciate it or even treat it very well if you don't offer her a context in which she can. Also, there's no universal rule for what kind of context a woman might find sexy. For instance, there are probably some women who read Danielle Steel novels who would be turned on by the phrase "glistening jewel".

I use the word "top" in a rather wanton manner to prove whatever point I happen to be endorsing at the moment. What I meant when I used it in the post I addressed to you is that it seems to me that you want to be sexual with a woman whose sexual behavior is assertive and being driven by her own arousal but I doubt that you would know what was really driving such behavior. A woman can be sexually assertive even if she is not at all aroused. A woman can be very aroused and not at all sexually assertive. There is a kind of feedback loop at times but not necessarily. It's very cool to me the way that Corri has learned to drive her arousal by being sexually assertive. I have no clue how a man could possibly tell the difference between a woman who is doing that and one who is being sexually assertive because she is aroused. Really it's the same thing except that I'm kind of subconsciously being sexually assertive (seeking out sexual stimulation and connections) in my thoughts which drives my arousal down well worn old trails in my monkey brain. For instance, a long time ago I bought a copy of a popular sex book where you tear out secret envelopes with "His" and "Her" activities. Clearly, most of the "Her" activities were going to involve the woman being sexually assertive or at least not passively responsive. One that I "did" to my 2bx was putting oil on his back and then Mbing by rubbing up and down his back and *ss. To me this seems like a very "top' like activity. I was being driven by my arousal when I did this but I had already taken the actions of buying the book, reading the book, thinking about the activity etc. so I didn't need the activity itself to turn me on. However, I could have gone into the activity "cold" and I doubt that my 2bx would have known the difference. (Of course his response to this activity was to label it "chick stuff" so....)My point is -Why do you care at what exact point in a sexual encounter your wife becomes aroused or desirous? If she is willing to engage in activities you enjoy and she is happy with her level of arousal and satisfaction, why wouldn't that be enough?

"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver