Pepe + Agathe · Primary Partnership · Active since April 29, 2026
No triggers logged yet.
64 questions. 8 voice recordings. 8 weeks of data. Everything that matters before Sunday.
Read as: how strongly both of you agree within each section. Green (85%+) means both answered with high confidence and mutual clarity. Amber (70-84%) means there is some variation worth discussing. Red (below 70%) means this section has genuine friction on at least one side. One red does not mean incompatible. It means this is the session's agenda.
Each line is one person's average score across all questions in each section. Closer together means similar intensity. The shape of each line matters more than the distance between them. If both lines dip in the same place, you both feel the tension there. That is not a problem. That is honest data.
Gap = the distance between your individual scores in each section. This is not a compatibility score. It is an intensity difference. A gap of 10 means one of you cares about this 10% more than the other, not that you disagree. 0-5: natural variation. 6-10: worth a conversation. 11-20: different positions. 20+: active friction. You have zero sections above 10.
All 9 sections. Scale questions and key open answers. Green = aligned, amber = 1-point gap, red = 2-point gap.
| Question | Agathe | Pepe | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Comfortable with ENM partner label | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aligned |
| Consider this a primary partnership | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aligned |
| Agreed definition of primary matters | 5/5 | 4/5 | 1pt gap |
| #1 designation shows in daily behavior | 5/5 | 4/5 | 1pt gap |
| Alignment importance | 5/5 | 4/5 | 1pt gap |
Notes stored locally in your browser only.
| Question | Agathe | Pepe | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Once/week matters to me | 4/5 | 5/5 | 1pt gap |
| Comfortable with extended apart | 3/5 | 3/5 | Aligned |
| Response speed during waking hours | 3/5 | 2/5 | 1pt gap |
| Proactive contact at least once/week | 5/5 | 4/5 | 1pt gap |
| Knowing about upcoming unavailability | 5/5 | 4/5 | 1pt gap |
| Alignment importance | 5/5 | 3/5 | 2pt gap |
Notes stored locally in your browser only.
| Question | Agathe | Pepe | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Comfortable with partner + shared social circle | 2/5 | 1/5 | 1pt gap |
| Partner tells me when starting someone new | 5/5 | 4/5 | 1pt gap |
| I have the right to raise concerns | 5/5 | 3/5 | 2pt gap |
| Immediate disclosure of new fluid bond | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aligned |
| Some form of sexual exclusivity wanted | 2/5 | 3/5 | 1pt gap |
| Alignment importance | 3/5 | 5/5 | 2pt gap (inverted) |
She has navigated ENM through a 5-year primary partnership. She knows what goes wrong at 6 months, at 18 months, during NRE episodes, during the first time your partner has real feelings for someone else. She knows the somatic response, the timing of the rupture points, the specific grief of feeling secondary without being told you are. He knows none of this from experience yet. The asymmetry is a resource, not a problem. Access it.
Notes stored locally in your browser only.
| Question | Agathe | Pepe | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Full transparency non-negotiable | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aligned |
| Comfortable discussing openly | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aligned |
| Agreed STI testing cadence | 4/5 | 5/5 | 1pt gap |
| Explicit agreed contraception | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aligned |
| Alignment importance | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aligned |
Notes stored locally in your browser only.
| Question | Agathe | Pepe | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Partner checks in proactively | 4/5 | 4/5 | Aligned |
| Partner tells me when I affected them | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aligned |
| Need reasoning, not just conclusions | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aligned |
| Can handle blunt direct feedback | 4/5 | 4/5 | Aligned |
| Presence first, solutions can wait | 4/5 | 3/5 | 1pt gap |
| Alignment importance | 5/5 | 4/5 | 1pt gap |
Notes stored locally in your browser only.
| Question | Agathe | Pepe | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| D/s is core to the connection | 4/5 | 5/5 | 1pt gap |
| Clear play/everyday distinction wanted | 3/5 | 3/5 | Aligned |
| Comfortable with explicit negotiation | 4/5 | 4/5 | Aligned |
| Frame should evolve post-courtship | 3/5 | 4/5 | 1pt gap |
| Dynamic should deepen now | 4/5 | 5/5 | 1pt gap |
| Alignment importance | 4/5 | 4/5 | Aligned |
Notes stored locally in your browser only.
| Question | Agathe | Pepe | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Long-term vision: years not months | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aligned |
| Quarterly reviews taken seriously | 3/5 | 5/5 | 2pt gap |
| Periodic formal check-ins needed | 3/5 | 3/5 | Aligned |
| Emergency review if losing self | 4/5 | 5/5 | 1pt gap |
| Can exit with integrity if needed | 4/5 | 5/5 | 1pt gap |
| Ending well matters as much as beginning | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aligned |
| Alignment importance | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aligned |
Notes stored locally in your browser only.
Notes stored locally in your browser only.
"I believe we need to be extra cautious with the opening, checking regularly, having a little bit more restrictions at the beginning so that we build up the trust slowly. I believe in us long term and I don't want to risk it for pleasure here and there. Even for a good connection."
"That I'm falling faster and harder than I know how to hold. I'm the beginner in this. You have context I don't have yet. I love you more than I know what to do with, and I don't fully know the rules of the game we're playing, and both of those things are true at the same time."
Notes stored locally in your browser only.
In priority order. These are not problems. They are the conversations that make this durable.
She is not asking for a veto. Her voice recordings were precise and already self-constrained: "It must be genuine, not insecurity-driven. 'She has bigger boobs than me': out of the question. A deeper, real pattern-based concern: fair game." She has already built the constraint into the right itself.
His 3/5 is a boundary against what he imagines the 5/5 version looks like: constant accountability, required reporting. He is not rejecting her input. He is protecting against what he fears input becomes.
The problem: both are imagining the worst version of the other's position. She reads his 3/5 as "don't bring it up." He imagines her 5/5 as "everything requires discussion."
This gap will cause silent friction because it will never present as a fight. It will present as her feeling quietly deprioritized while he feels fully present.
She runs on frequency. He runs on availability. Both are genuine forms of presence. They do not automatically produce the same experience for the person receiving them.
Her flag from the retreat recordings: "Three weeks of full project immersion while 20 minutes away without seeing her is an issue." She wants someone with their own inner world. But an already-full life that doesn't include her twice a week is a different kind of problem.
She has navigated ENM through a 5-year primary partnership, made mistakes, paid costs, learned, and rebuilt. She knows what goes wrong at 6 months, at 18 months, during NRE episodes, during the first time your partner has real feelings for someone else. He knows none of this from experience.
Her 3/5 is not carelessness. It is the earned position of someone who knows that no protocol anticipates everything. His 5/5 is the correct intelligent response of a beginner: I do not have instinct yet, so I want rules.
The risk: she may under-explain her reasoning, assuming he will develop the same instincts, without accounting for how long and what it cost her to develop them.
Both value reflection. She resists bureaucracy. He builds systems. Her resistance is specific and reasonable: monthly reviews with her previous partner felt like she was carrying them alone. The yearly one was the richest because it had real stakes and enough time had passed to see genuine patterns.
Not in the questionnaire data. In the scenario responses. It will matter the first time both are triggered simultaneously.
Both carry the same core fear: losing themselves.
Neither of these will feel wrong in the moment. Both will feel like love. That is the problem.
Applied to their data, not generic ENM advice.
The standing rhythm. Built to keep this alive without making it feel like work.
In person at hers. She returns from the retreat around 1-2pm.
Partnership anniversary. Full JVA revisit. Update this report with what changed, what held, what needs renegotiating.
Add to Google Calendar90 minutes. One output: the Intergalactic Operating Agreement V1.
Read the solid-ground section to each other. Not a summary. The actual quotes. Both 5/5 on primary. Both 5/5 on health transparency. Both 5/5 on long-term. Both 5/5 on ending well. Let the alignment land before the gaps. Most couples skip this. Do not skip this.
Each person answers: "What does a good week look like to me in specific behaviors?" and "What does a week that leaves me feeling deprioritized look like?" Map the actual floor. Name it. Write it down. This is not a negotiation. It is a calibration.
(a) The concerns protocol: She describes what a good-faith concern sounds like. He names what kind of input he can receive without feeling monitored. Together: agree on language. Practice it once. Move on.
(b) The opening pace: Both are saying slow. Name it as shared. Define what it means: which existing connections are inside the ENM frame, and what would a new connection require before happening?
Agree the monthly light model (30 min, 3 questions) plus annual deep review. Pick the three monthly questions together. Write them down. Done.
She asked to meet his people. He admitted he is the beginner without the map. These are connected: she is the guide to the terrain he lacks experience in. He is the window into his world she is asking to enter. Neither is an obligation. Both are offers.
Each person says the one thing from their Section 9 answer, out loud, to each other, without the form as a buffer.
Not what was said. What is underneath what was said.
Her structure is not fear. It is investment. Every protocol, every request for transparency, every "tell me immediately when something starts," every careful voice recording made at a retreat while thinking about the partnership she was building. All of it is the architecture of someone who has decided this is worth protecting.
She has done ENM before. She knows what it costs when the foundation is careless. Her requests for structure are not control. They are evidence that she intends to stay.
She told you something in the last recording that she hasn't said directly yet: "The rules dissolve over time. With my previous partner they started with many rules. Most dissolved naturally as trust deepened. The end point is freedom." She is not building a cage. She is building scaffolding. It comes down when the building stands on its own.
He already said it in the answer he was most afraid to give. But there is a layer beneath it.
His autonomy is not distance. His need for space is not a hedge. When he asks not to explain himself every time he goes quiet for a day, he is not creating escape routes. He is telling her how he refuels. He chose this partnership. He chose the questionnaire, the formality of writing it all down, the level of vulnerability in his answers, because that is how he builds things he intends to keep.
His 5/5 on long-term. His 5/5 on ending well. The willingness to write the most vulnerable sentence in this document: "I love you more than I know what to do with, and I don't fully know the rules of the game we're playing." These are not the words of someone with one foot out.
Give him the blueprints. He will use them.
What this report gets right, and what it can't do on its own.
Curated by gap area. The ones that actually help. No generic listicles.
bdsmtest.org scores. Agathe: Mar 2026. Pepe: May 2, 2026.
Result ID: p9Y9qDWY
Result ID: 2kLKsWQs
Nine instruments. A constellation. A much clearer picture of how you're each wired, where you'll collide, and why. Take them separately and compare. The gaps in the results will tell you more than the results themselves.
The instruments the ancients used before psychology had a name for any of this. Less scientific. More true.
Stored locally in your browser only. Compare when you've both taken them.
Private. Lives in your browser only. Never transmitted anywhere.
No triggers logged yet.
Gottman: knowing your partner's psychological world. Update whenever something shifts in either of you.
The lowest JVA score. The highest growth lever. Map where you are, where the friction is, and where you want to go.
Jealousy is information. Map it precisely. The component feelings are: fear of loss, fear of replacement, wounded pride, grief of feeling secondary. Each has a different address.
Compersion is the ENM-specific emotion: feeling genuine happiness when your partner experiences joy with someone else. It develops. It can be blocked. Map where each of you is.
NRE is the highest-risk period for the primary bond (Balzarini et al., 2017). Attention and emotional availability shift without the primary partner understanding why. The protective factor: proactive communication before the loop starts.
Gap 3 from the JVA: the experience asymmetry. She has context he doesn't have yet. This is a resource. Map the vision separately. The gaps tell you more than the agreements.