ought to be seen as standard. Especially because, paradoxically, this kind of instinctive connection will sometimes throw me off guard, make me unlikely to communicate when I probably ought to, because if he can read me that well -- it's so tempting to assume that "he just knows" everything. But of course he doesn't. I later had a couple rough moments with that particular guy, where I didn't tell him about boundaries that were actually pretty important, because I thought he could just tell -- and of course he couldn't always "just tell." Sometimes he could, but sometimes he couldn't.) The overall moral of the story is this. Even with him, even with this guy, who totally blindsided me with his ability to read me despite the fact that he barely knew me: even with him, I had to be able to talk directly about what I wanted. Our connection was established because I was able to say, "Okay, that bite was a tad gentle, here's how I really like it, and here's what not to do with your teeth on me." All my most extraordinary sexual connections have benefited from everyone involved taking ownership of their desire, and talking about it directly at least a little bit. I occasionally come across people who ask me how they can get their partners to do BDSM without talking about it directly. While I appreciate and sympathize with both their need to do BDSM, and their anxiety about talking about it -- I just can't get behind the premise of the question. The fantasy of a sexual relationship that is totally instinctive and perfect without any effort is just that -- a fantasy. And moreover, while you might be able to get some BDSM experiences without actually having a conversation about BDSM, direct sexual communication is not a threat to your sexual experiences -- it can improve them. Do what you want, really, as long as it's consensual. If you want to have sex that's not communicative, that is your prerogative, as long as it's always consensual. (It's worth asking, though... are you