OrgasmLover Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 I have noticed in my lifes experiences that the only woman that I ever fell in love with was one in which I experienced intensely pleasurable orgasms. This woman was by no means the nicest, and eventually dumped me. In contrast, there have been several woman in my life who I felt that I loved, but not the head over heals, "in love," type of love, and never experienced that same intense orgasm with. I would also point out that the woman that I fell in love with, was the only woman that I was truely physically attracted to. The woman in which I have had later relationships have been attractive to me, but not to the same level. I am wondering if other men have had this experience. Is it possible that most men must have this intense physical experience as a prerequisite for a head over heels love experience? Link to post Share on other sites
Flicker Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 Don't be an idiot. Of course "intensely pleasurable orgasms" are not a pre-requistite for falling deeply in love. Many people fall in love with their partners before they even get to the sex part. Some people who have amazing sex never fall in love. I think you need to re-think your definition of love. I think if the reason you felt so strongly about this woman was because of strong physical attraction and mind blowing orgasms - it was not love at all. It was LUST. Don't panic. It's easily confused. When you truely love someone, you will feel like you're a better person around them. You will wonder how you ever did without them. It will feel natural and easy. Hmm. Just a thought... Link to post Share on other sites
honeybunch2k5 Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 Maybe you were in intense lust, and not in love... It sounds like you were thinking with the wrong head. Link to post Share on other sites
freckles3131 Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 I have noticed in my lifes experiences that the only woman that I ever fell in love with was one in which I experienced intensely pleasurable orgasms. This woman was by no means the nicest, and eventually dumped me. To say you were "in love" with this woman and in the same breath say, "This woman was by no means the nicest" is borderline dysfunctional. Yes, it was lust as the others said. And yes, you need to re-evaluate what your definition of "love" or "in love" is if you are basing it on the physical connection.(esp. if she "by no means the nicest"...If you don't change your outlook, you will never truly find healthy, good relationships as you will always feel the "need" to "feel the intense physical attraction" to "be in love" and will miss out on "good" woman and "true love" You will be chasing after the wrong things(the lust/strong physical connection) and end up with other women who "by no means aren't the nicest" Love is: companionship, trust, honesty, a common bond, common values, morals etc...a mutual respect, support etc...etc....and yes, there should be physical attraction...but to base your feelings of being "in love" on that....is ass backwards. How old are you anyways? Sometimes the realization of what "real love is" comes with maturity/age...hopefully you are just too young to "get it" at this point...that will come in time...but, if you are old enough to "know better" and don't "know" or "get it" , I don't know what to say other than read more posts on this board, it might help. Link to post Share on other sites
freckles3131 Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 When you truely love someone, you will feel like you're a better person around them. You will wonder how you ever did without them. It will feel natural and easy. Hmm. Just a thought... Yes and....yes! I imagine if this women "wasn't the nicest of persons" then you were not feeling "natural and easy" with her.....which is NOT love....... Link to post Share on other sites
OrgasmLover Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 Let me say that I think we all have had relationships where we think the other person is the perfect match for us; the only problem is that there is just no chemistry. Perhaps I overstated the chemistry part, but it is nonetheless a critical component of being in love. If it were not, we would all be in love with our best friends. If attraction is not a large component to love, why are the other posters not in love with their best freinds? Can the other posters honestly tell me that if sexual attraction suddenly disappeared from their partner that this would have NO impact on their relationship. I believe people can be very judgemental, and I would ask the other posters to address my questions. Link to post Share on other sites
freckles3131 Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 I have noticed in my lifes experiences that the only woman that I ever fell in love with was one in which I experienced intensely pleasurable orgasms. This woman was by no means the nicest, and eventually dumped me. In contrast, there have been several woman in my life who I felt that I loved, but not the head over heals, "in love," type of love, and never experienced that same intense orgasm with. I would also point out that the woman that I fell in love with, was the only woman that I was truely physically attracted to. The woman in which I have had later relationships have been attractive to me, but not to the same level. I am wondering if other men have had this experience. Is it possible that most men must have this intense physical experience as a prerequisite for a head over heels love experience? Of course there has to be a physical attraction for it to work or for one to "be in love" but.....for it to be the "main factor" and the "difference" is what is askew. As the other poster said, "people fall in love before they even have sex" You are equating "being in love " to "having intensely pleasurable orgasms" That is equating "being in love" to the "orgasm" and the "feeling that goes along with that and being "more" physically attracted to her.... You are saying you "define" love by "the intesity of the attraction/orgasm" You may have been "intensely attracted/lustful" and thus it FELT like "love" but, the level of the physical attraction/orgasm is not an indicator of "love" more of an indicator of phermones/lust level NOT a level of love.... To define "being in love" or whathaveyou in your mind...by how you "feel physically" towards someone is just not a healthy way to go about things... I have felt INTENSE passion/lust/desire for men....BUT......when I look past that there needs to be MORE to the story than that for me to "be in love' What you describe is being "in lust" not "in love" Yes, to "be in love" one needs attraction, of course...it's only natural to want/need that in a life partner, but to have it be the "definition" is what is "off" Yes, if there was "no physical attraction" then it probably isn't "love".....one wants to be attracted to the one we want to spend the rest of our lives with, but to have it be the "driving force" and the priority....or the defining factor....is a bit, "high school" It's like that "puppy love' feeling we get in high school....do you think everytime I had "that feeling" over the years or "intense physical attraction" I was "in love" with each and every one of those guys....No. IF we all walked around basing "love" on how we intense we feel "physically" we would all be walking around with our head in the clouds and the inability to see beyond that and see the relationship in a clear way....and see that it is just "lust" Link to post Share on other sites
freckles3131 Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 Let me say that I think we all have had relationships where we think the other person is the perfect match for us; the only problem is that there is just no chemistry. Perhaps I overstated the chemistry part, but it is nonetheless a critical component of being in love. If it were not, we would all be in love with our best friends. If attraction is not a large component to love, why are the other posters not in love with their best freinds? Agreed. If there is "NO chemistry" then it isn't love. There does need to be SOME chemistry...no doubt...but to base the level of "love" on how strong your orgasms are...or how "physically attracted" you are....that is the point....Love is not about "level of orgasm" or "level of physical attraction" I have been more "physically attracted" to other men in my life than the one I am with now...yes, BUT.......despite me being "more physically attracted" to them...I know I wasn't "in love' and was self-aware enough to know the difference between lust/desire/strong physical connection...and what love is...and what love isn't... Maybe you should make a list of things you want in a life partner...all the REALLY important qualities...you want in a person.....see how many that person had....and from now on....when dating someone new...see how many they have....if they "meet' alot of items on the list, there is physical attraction...that is a good solid foundation to build from...but, yes...I do agree, again....there needs to be SOME physical attraction, but to "need it to be INTENSE" is just coveting those feelings of "lust" and if that is what you seek...that is seeking "lust" not "love" in the healthy sense of the word... May I ask why you broke up? What made her "not the nicest person in the world"? If you were overlooking some major moral fiber/character flaws to be with her....then it was lust...... Link to post Share on other sites
Curmudgeon Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 As others have said, that's lust, not love. The first time I married it was because I was young, foolish and fell in lust. The second time I fell in love with my wife (a five-year, totally platonic friend) on our first date, and she with me. We've been married going on 10 years and we're still in love. You aren't going to find true happiness, security and contentment with your small head. Link to post Share on other sites
freckles3131 Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 Glad to see someone else here "gets it" Hard to put into words really... I guess you either "get it" or you don't. I hear you with the "married it because I was young,foolish" I think we all have done it, but smartened up and grew up. Cripes if I had a dime for every guy I felt "that" with.....if I thought I was "in love" with every one of them...I'd have alot of failed relationships under my belt.... Link to post Share on other sites
beforeandafter Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 They are all right. They are not being judgemental, just calling it like they see it. It is a very shallow and immature way of "love". Are you in a relationship now? If yes, perhaps if you aren't "feeling in love" like you think you should or want to be, you should end it with her. It isn't fair to her if you are "settling" in your eyes... Link to post Share on other sites
whichwayisup Posted January 29, 2006 Share Posted January 29, 2006 The love part is easy...It's making it last that counts. Wanting to make it last forever...Love is work at times! Not all happy and roses, though that is the stuff that makes the love stronger and grow. When you truely love someone, you will feel like you're a better person around them. You will wonder how you ever did without them. It will feel natural and easy. Exactly! Link to post Share on other sites
Curmudgeon Posted January 29, 2006 Share Posted January 29, 2006 Love is decidedly the easy part but maintaining a relationship is extremely hard work and must be a daily, conscious effort. The rewards make it well worth it. I didn't work hard at the first marriage, because comfortable and complascent. It lasted 25 years regardless, and shouldn't have. Thankfully, I learned the lessons that were there for me. Link to post Share on other sites
FoolishDriver Posted January 29, 2006 Share Posted January 29, 2006 I know from biology that when women orgasm, they release "love" chemicals that bond them with the man who caused the orgasm, leading them to fall in love with that person. I have never heard that to be the case with men. That's why women can stay loyal and fall in love with men they have sex with but men can have sex without love with dozens of women. There are of course exceptions, yours in particular being that you are male experiencing this female phenomenon. Link to post Share on other sites
beforeandafter Posted January 29, 2006 Share Posted January 29, 2006 I love how people post up, then get in a snit when you don't tell them what they want to hear (that what they are feeling/thinking is normal) and here we go and offer up some pretty sound advice and nothing more from them...I think we must have hit the nail on the head if he has nothing more to add. Link to post Share on other sites
Outcast Posted January 29, 2006 Share Posted January 29, 2006 It happens with some men but it seems the levels of chemicals vary more in men. elevated testosterone can suppress oxytocin and vasopressin. There is good evidence, Dr Fisher said, that men with higher testosterone levels tend to marry less often, be more abusive in their marriage, and divorce more regularly For the rest of this excellent article by one of the gurus of the biochemistry of love, see http://www.mcmanweb.com/love_lust.htm Link to post Share on other sites
OrgasmLover Posted January 29, 2006 Share Posted January 29, 2006 Perhaps I have had a unique experience set from other here. I have only had one relationship where sex was consistently pleasurable throughout the relationship (the woman I fell in love with). I stated she was not the nicest person in the world. This is true; but what I meant by this is that I have never, and will never have a relationship with a person that is not nice; she was just not the nicest. We had a 1 1/2 year relationship in which we shared good compatibility over many fronts, and eventually when I fell in love, perhaps that scared her away, at which point, I felt she did something that were hurtful (she flirted with another guy, and actually asked if he could take her home). I ended the relationship the next day. Although I have not had many relationships in my life (4) total including the one mentioned above. Each lasted from at least a year, and as long as 14 years, so since I have already mentioned that sex was not pleasurable in these other relationships, I think it is clear that I was not thinking with my 'other' head for the majority of my life, otherwise I would not have stayed in these comitted long-term relationships. I loved each of these women, we shared many things in common, I just was not that attracted to them. I appreciate advice, and often do gain insight from others, however, I do not appreciate, nor think name-calling is ever constructive or helpful. Link to post Share on other sites
Flicker Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 In my original post I implored that you not "be an idiot". I'm sorry if I offended you. After reading your subsequent posts I realise that you aren't being an idiot at all! It seems to me that you have had the two halves of love in separate relationships. You have had the companionship and togetherness with one woman and the intense attraction and amazing sex life with another. It is possible to have both halves within a relationship with one person. Isn't accepting anything else just settling for less than you deserve? Isn't also unfair to your partner? I wonder if the women you have been with were aware of you feeling that something was missing? Where I come from, there is a well known saying: "It's a hard road finding the perfect woman, mate" Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts