Posted 1:58 AM by Anonymous

OK, I took Raymond's happiness test, and I was sort of shocked to discover that I got a score of four, placing me at the bottom end of the happy crowd. Of course, questions in such a test are phrased in such a way that polarize possible responses, and as I don't tend to live in polar emotional climates, such responses rarely reflect truly how I feel.

Let's leave all that aside. The one question I want to talk about is the one asking which quality you would most look for in a marriage partner. The choices: good-looking, rich, intelligent, compatible, a terrific lover, and understanding. The correct answer, ahem, is "compatible." The rational is such: "When choosing a mate, a happy person will pick a congenial, compatible figure rather than someone romantic and glamorous."

I see now where I went wrong in my answer, which was "a terrific lover": I'm not conventional. The questioner appears to have a view of sexual attraction that is removed from context. Sorry, stud, just because someone is "romantic" in a conventional sense (i.e., buys flowers, sends little notes, etc.) doesn't mean that their romanticism is particularly spurred by the person they're with; it may just be what they think is expected of them as a partner. Don't get me wrong -- I buy flowers and write nice notes too -- but the romantic things I do are specific to my partner's desires. Oh, and don't even get me started on "glamorous." Preoccupying oneself with products to enhance one's surface beauty is the fast track to a total lack of interest on my part.

I actually thought "a terrific lover" was a pretty astute way of signifying all the different things I enjoy in a partner. (A note before I begin: since I'm attracted to women, I'm going to eschew the genderless signifier and go for the female-specific reference. Please replace as you read with whichever gender(s) you prefer. OK, 'nuff said.) In order to qualify as a terrific lover in my book, a woman has to have several key qualities. In no particular order, and by no means complete:

She's sexy. What does that mean? To me, someone is sexy when she's happy, when she enjoys who she is, inside and out, and when she has an open, uninhibited view of sexuality. Boundaries are fine, but prudes and moralists get no play over here.

She cares for me, and she knows I care for her. There's trust and openness between us. It encourages each of us to be who we are, individually and together.

She's intelligent and funny. If we can't talk, laugh, and play during sex, both naughtily and nicely, dear me, what is the point? We aren't fucking machines.

She's a good communicator, both talking and listening. Otherwise, how else will I find out what particularly turns her on or off? How will she find that out about me? Believe me, while there are women who are generally talented at sexual acts, there is nothing so fabulous as someone who knows exactly how to get you off, and only someone who's a good communicator (orally, physically, telepathically, or all three) knows how to do that.

She's generous, and she's assertive about what she wants as well. There is nothing better than a lover who knows how to both give and receive. Spice of life, baby.

She's compatible. It's great to share a lot of things and differ in others. We enjoy and learn from each other.

These qualities, not to mention the afterglow of radiant sex, ripple outward into life in general. We're not having sex all the time, of course. The qualities that make her a terrific lover make her a fabulous partner in life.

And now, off to sleep. Alone, sadly, but just for the next couple of nights. Come Monday next, my terrific lover will be officially moving in. The answering machine already says "Cheshire and Sarah." Am I happy? You know it!