Author WRbeach60954 Posted November 11, 2005 Author Posted November 11, 2005 To post my opinion I feel some good points have been brought up. Emotional connection/bonding. I also agree with comparing sex to hugs n kisses as weird as that may be, they both just seem necessary. And I also think it provides a better meaning to the relationship as far as what exactly you mean to eachother. Keep this thread up guys.
JS17 Posted November 11, 2005 Posted November 11, 2005 I left a relationship in college (I want to say 8 / 9 months or so) because of the lack of intimacy...including sex.
TUDOR Posted November 11, 2005 Posted November 11, 2005 I left a relationship in college (I want to say 8 / 9 months or so) because of the lack of intimacy...including sex. JS17 is not alone, there are at least 2 or 3 threads a week if not more posted from people complaining of the lack of sex in their relationships. This is pretty big issue and happens more often than people think. It is also one of the biggest reasons for affairs to happen. People want sex and when they don't get it, they will go else where to find it.
JS17 Posted November 11, 2005 Posted November 11, 2005 JS17 is not alone, there are at least 2 or 3 threads a week if not more posted from people complaining of the lack of sex in their relationships. This is pretty big issue and happens more often than people think. It is also one of the biggest reasons for affairs to happen. People want sex and when they don't get it, they will go else where to find it. no no...NO sex and it wasn't my choice. I never thought about cheating on him, I really cared about and respected him. I just knew it wasn't the right kind of relationship for me at that time....or more to the point, we weren't right for each other at that time.
Walk Posted November 11, 2005 Posted November 11, 2005 To post my opinion I feel some good points have been brought up. Emotional connection/bonding. I also agree with comparing sex to hugs n kisses as weird as that may be, they both just seem necessary. And I also think it provides a better meaning to the relationship as far as what exactly you mean to each other. Keep this thread up guys. Somebody posted a response in another thread about how woman view the hugs/kisses as morally right, while men's desire for sex was considered wrong. Unfortunately I won't word this as eloquently as that woman did. But it really hit home for me. Basically, she was saying that women tend to view the hugs/kisses as the right way to approach physically intimacy, while man's desire for sex was carnal and crude. But why should it be viewed that way? To each of the sexes, both are necessities. And these needs often overlap between the sexes. (women need sex too.) I think it's been shoved down women's throats (ha ha, no pun intended) that sex is bad (and that we're bad for wanting it) for so long that the female gender is still struggling with the moral implications. It's where the idea of women who have sex with more then X number of men are sluts, where as men are not. In order for us to preserve our status as "good" girls, we aren't supposed to like sex, or want it. This is a broad generalization, and obviously doesn't apply to all. But I do think there are many women who still get hung up on the "good girl/bad girl" mentality that's been instilled in us from a young age. (spell checked for Chariot )
I Luv the Chariot OH Posted November 11, 2005 Posted November 11, 2005 Right, except I'm wrong? Please, do go on..... I'm right that you've never experienced this? I'm wrong that all the posts are a waste of time? Wow. I truly apologize for my belief that you were closed minded and ignorant. I admire someone who will listen and attempt to understand others perspectives. It shows great depth of character and maturity. Glad to hear you are willing to admit your error. Your assumptions about me were wrong. Hence why I quoted them. How am I being closed-minded for having a different opinion than everybody else? None of you are saying anything non-cliched enough to make me change my mind. "Sex is two becoming one" (thanks Spice Girls!), "it's showing your love without words" (because there are obviously no other ways to show love!), "it's the biggest gift you can give to another" (i...actually don't even know how to respond to that, it's so absurd). glittergurl: it sure didn't make me feel middle-aged, overweight, and unattractive!
Walk Posted November 11, 2005 Posted November 11, 2005 Your assumptions about me were wrong. Hence why I quoted them. How am I being closed-minded for having a different opinion than everybody else? None of you are saying anything non-cliched enough to make me change my mind. "Sex is two becoming one" (thanks Spice Girls!), "it's showing your love without words" (because there are obviously no other ways to show love!), "it's the biggest gift you can give to another" (i...actually don't even know how to respond to that, it's so absurd). I'm not asking this to be sarcastic, or rude, so for this post please don't take it that way... But instead of all of us explaining why we believe sex is vitally important to a healthy relationship. Could you explain why you belive it's not? And as I said, I am asking this in the most sincere, honest way. There's no sarcasm, no bitter rude remarks, etc. I'm curious and would very much like to hear your opinion on this. I would like one person to explain to me why a relationship "needs" sex and will be "destine (?) to fail" without it. Do you believe that a relationship could continue for an extended time without sex? And if so, how? What would replace the physical act of sex? Why would this be more beneficial? How would you conteract the physical need for sex? Also, have you experienced a long term relationship? More then a few months.. If so, how long? and was it only one, or more then one? I will happily concede defeat if you can convince me of your stance. And I will listen (read) your reply with an open mind.
I Luv the Chariot OH Posted November 11, 2005 Posted November 11, 2005 I appreciate you being civil. I think I've expressed already why I don't think sex is a necessity to a relationship. Sex in itself is not an emotional act. We give it emotional value, but we can give any act emotional value. I think we're still kind of riding off the sexual revolution of the 1960s. It's a very cultural thing. North Americans and Europeans, most affected by the revolution, are very sexual cultures. So most people just assume it's the natural and right and necessary thing to do. I've had two long term relationships (one of which was an engagement, but I was very young and very naive), and I have am very hopeful about my current one (it's only been six weeks so far, though). While agree it's not entirely feasible for most people to have a long-term relationship without sex, I still don't believe that sex is a necessity to every relationship just on principle. One of my long term relationships was without sex, and I don't believe I would have loved him more completely if we had had sex (and the reason we broke up was nothing to do with sex).
Walk Posted November 11, 2005 Posted November 11, 2005 I still don't believe that sex is a necessity to every relationship just on principle. One of my long term relationships was without sex, and I don't believe I would have loved him more completely if we had had sex (and the reason we broke up was nothing to do with sex). Was he happy without the sex? Or at least content enough not to bring it up once you had stated your position? How did you create that emotional closeness that one gets naturally after sex? How were you able to continue to keep his interest without the sex? And I disagree with sex not being an emotional act "in and of itself". I've never been able to have sex with a man, and not feel a strong attachment to him. It wasn't love, but it wasn't purely physical like lust would be. So for me, I've never been able to differentiate sex from emotion. Even when I really really wanted to differentiate it, I still couldn't. And it was explained to me a few times that if men aren't getting their sexual needs met, then they start focusing on other areas of the relationship that they feel are lacking. Like not enough space, or time with their friend, or money problems, for example. So if their sexual needs were met, then these issues would never arise, (or not to the boiling point) which could save many relationships from failing. The man would be more driven to stay at home instead of going out with the guys, and less concerned with outside problems like money. (Theoretically) So there's the possiblity that although your relationship didn't end because of lack of sex, it may have been a contributor, if the above statement is true. What do you think? So, if you can answer specifically the "how did you keep his interest from other woman without sex" part, and if I can apply that to my relationship, then I'll kiss the ground you walk on.
I Luv the Chariot OH Posted November 11, 2005 Posted November 11, 2005 It was a mutual agreement. We planned to wait until we were married because we felt it would be much more special/sacred/otherhollywoodterms then. Of course, that's not abstaining completely, but in all the time we dated he didn't say a word about sex (other than the marriage thing), and neither did I. I'm sure the strong emotional attachment you've felt for men after having sex with them wasn't based purely on the sex (as in, you felt nothing for them prior, had sex, and said you yourself, "You know, maybe I actually DO like him!"). I know people that have had emotionless sex with prostitutes. I know people that have had emotionless sex with friends, even sometimes significant others. I think msot people are capable of it. Your theory sounds like a good one, and I guess I'll never know if it was true or not in my case, but all I can tell you is if he wanted sex, he did a really really good job of hiding it, what with not speaking a word of it (other than that he wanted to wait) throughout the entire relationship. I kind of hope by default if a guy's dating me, I won't need sex to keep him interested. That's the reason I always wait so long, so I can be sure. If my personality and (very deviant) ideals aren't enough to keep him excited, he's probably not the right guy for me.
Walk Posted November 11, 2005 Posted November 11, 2005 Thanks for the honest answers. I'm sure the strong emotional attachment you've felt for men after having sex with them wasn't based purely on the sex (as in, you felt nothing for them prior, had sex, and said you yourself, "You know, maybe I actually DO like him!"). I know people that have had emotionless sex with prostitutes. I know people that have had emotionless sex with friends, even sometimes significant others. I think msot people are capable of it. Not sure if I understood this right, but I'll answer the way I read it. (my degrading past.) I've had sex with complete strangers on a one night stand basis, and felt attached to that person, more then I would've if we'd gone out for coffee and had great converstaion. It wasn't love, but feelings were there.. So I can't say it was because I knew the guy prior, and that's why I had feelings. For me, I can't have sex without emotional involvement. So if I say sex is a way to be more emotionally connected, that's what I mean, I can't get that connection through grocery shopping, or just cuddling. And it's extremely intense for me with someone I love. Not just feels good, or I feel more loving, but like I'm a part of something so much bigger then just me. (Not always during, but right after.) That's the reason I always wait so long, so I can be sure. If my personality and (very deviant) ideals aren't enough to keep him excited, he's probably not the right guy for me. I bet you're a bit more then most men can handle. You seem a little... uh... strong willed. *sigh* I'm left searching for the holy grail of sexually capturing the man's attention without actually having to put out. ha ha. Your theory sounds like a good one, and I guess I'll never know heh. Wish I knew too. Thanks for expounding. I think I understand a little better where you're coming from. Not sure I agree... but *shrug* to each their own.
Outcast Posted November 11, 2005 Posted November 11, 2005 I think this would come from someone who hasn't had sex with someone they are deeply and truely in love with. If I'm not mistaken, this person is a virgin. I'm sure the strong emotional attachment you've felt for men after having sex with them wasn't based purely on the sex As a matter of fact, it very well can be. See the post on the biology of sex.
Walk Posted November 11, 2005 Posted November 11, 2005 Outcast: I think this would come from someone who hasn't had sex with someone they are deeply and truely in love with. If I'm not mistaken, this person is a virgin. Do you mean the author of the above quote? Or who the author of the above quote was speaking about? Cause I may just take offense if you're implying I'm a virgin. Or should I? Maybe it'd be cool to be a virgin? Isn't that the "In" thing now? Just wondering if I need to be offended or not. thanks.
NrclptcNSmniak Posted November 11, 2005 Posted November 11, 2005 walk.... i really am truly in love with your avatar..... anyway..... this is just slightly frustrating... im sorry but... really... I Luv the Chariot OH...... you should be intelligent enough to dertermine if he's only in it for the sex without having to wait an absurdly long time for only that one reason........ unless the guy is really ugly and ... smarter than you (because then it could be difficult to tell)... haha..... and really... do you really think that the reason why we have sex is due to the stigma created by hollywood and the sexual revolution of the 60's?..... people have had sex out of marriage for a looooooooooong time......... i mean... it really is one of our basic instincts... i actually do compare it to kissing and holding hands... actually i feel that sex is more necessary than both because of the hormones , and the emotional and physical intimacy that it involves... actually... in my opinion ... your view on sex is extremely hypocritical. as you are saying that hollywood is the only reason why we do have sex, what is the reason for you not having sex. sex is a basic action that is genetically programmed into our being. what is your exact reason for denying yourself, and your boyfriend... if you both know you love each other, why is it so improper... really if anything... waiting for marriage is retarded... what really is marriage.. it is an institution built around raising kids in a modular family. if you are not having sex with the intention of having kids (aka using a condom or other forms of contraception) then what's the big deal..... just because you arent married?? it isn't right??? who the hell said that... the church... what is the church... another institution that controls society. what is hollywood??..... and really most things in a relationship arent absolutely necessary... such as living together, holding hands, kissing, saying that you love the person... the list goes on and on.... (you guys might be thinking about the saying that you love the person thing but you could have it already implied that you love them without saying it) we just use necessary loosely. was my earlier post really that cliche'd? .... we say you are close minded because it seems like you really are...... i have presented some very nice points but you don't even address them at all... why? maybe you just cant formulate an intelligent response to rebuttle my previous posts. bah it's so frustrating being ignored...
RainyDayWoman Posted November 11, 2005 Posted November 11, 2005 "tell me if i should be offended"...? what is wrong with people? my goodness. everybody calm down. this place is nothing to get worked up about, and if you do, maybe you should stay away from it. don't get offended over stupid things. if someone thinks you're a virgin, and you're not, get over it and say "actually, no i'm not, but you wouldn't have any way to know that so it's not your fault." would you be offended if someone you don't know guessed your favourite colour was blue when it's really red? it's like some people come here looking to be ridiculed, and they find an insult in every letter of every word. chill out. that's what i am going to do right now, since there's no sense in worrying about it.
TUDOR Posted November 11, 2005 Posted November 11, 2005 It was a mutual agreement. We planned to wait until we were married because we felt it would be much more special/sacred/otherhollywoodterms then. Of course, that's not abstaining completely, but in all the time we dated he didn't say a word about sex (other than the marriage thing), and neither did I. I think it is awesome that you want to save yourself for marriage, what a great gift to give your husband when the time comes. But not having sex for those reasons ins't exactly what we are talking about. You have good reasons to obstain but it is not your plan to always obstain. Are you saying that even after marriage you would not have sex? I think the point trying to be made are committed relationships even marriage that don't have sex in them are going to have problems at some point. There is thread right now about a women who is with a man that physically can't have sex, they have not had sex in 2 yrs. While she loves him and wants to take care of him the missing sex in her life is a problem. He recognizes this as well and told her she can pursue a sex life outside of the marriage. While that is a whole other debate it still shows that even when sex isn't physically possilbe it is a problem not having it all. So two people whe are capable of it and don't do it, this is recipe for failure in my opinion.
Recommended Posts