The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
"If you really loved me, you'd stay with me even without the sex"
Dhalphir
don't you open that trapdooryou're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
don't you open that trapdooryou're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
This is a line that one of my friends recently said to her boyfriend.
They've been together for about a year, give or take a month, and in the last few months he's been bitching to me about the almost total lack of sex...he said it was happening less than once a month. I suspect he may have been exaggerating a bit, but probably not much.
I asked my friend about it...because I'm tactless and blunt like that, and she said that she just didn't think sex was very important, and that if he really loved her, he'd stay with her even without sex.
I think she's dreaming, personally. In my opinion, relationships have to have both the physical and the emotional side to them, or they're just halves of a relationship. Quite apart from the fact that its common knowledge that sex is one of the few driving goals a man has, and its silly to think that he can repress it healthily.
What do you guys think? And also aside from this specific situation, what do you think about the idea in general? There's a phrase I heard recently..."A man may have many problems with his wife, but if he's getting plenty of sex, they don't matter."
They've been together for about a year, give or take a month, and in the last few months he's been bitching to me about the almost total lack of sex...he said it was happening less than once a month. I suspect he may have been exaggerating a bit, but probably not much.
I asked my friend about it...because I'm tactless and blunt like that, and she said that she just didn't think sex was very important, and that if he really loved her, he'd stay with her even without sex.
I think she's dreaming, personally. In my opinion, relationships have to have both the physical and the emotional side to them, or they're just halves of a relationship. Quite apart from the fact that its common knowledge that sex is one of the few driving goals a man has, and its silly to think that he can repress it healthily.
What do you guys think? And also aside from this specific situation, what do you think about the idea in general? There's a phrase I heard recently..."A man may have many problems with his wife, but if he's getting plenty of sex, they don't matter."
Dhalphir on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
Edit: Or it's the outgrowth of another issue, like lack of trust, someone else, etc.
Personally, I'd either solve the underlying problem or move on.
Well, there is some ambiguity here. I interpreted what he said as meaning the sex tailored off and she's complacent w/ having it infrequently, not that it was always infrequent.
Ah, the forbidden fruit effect.
As for a relationship without sex, well, if the woman says the man should logically be willing to endure something for the sake of love, doesn't that mean that she also should logically be willing to endure something else (i.e. sex) for the sake of love as well? As such, it might be nice of her to have sex with him the same way it would be nice of him to give her a back rub or fix her breakfast in bed. If meeting somewhere in the middle isn't something either is willing to agree to, then I guess it would be best to break up.
ETA: Of course if there's some physical or mental/emotional thing here, it's a whole 'nother ball of wax
I'll be fine, just give me a minute, a man's got a limit, I can't get a life if my heart's not in it.
If a girl told me that "even without the sex" thing, I'd reply "If you really loved me, you'd stay with me even with me having sex with other girls".
I think this phrase is pretty callous towards men. Sure, for plenty of guys it's true, but for those to whom the phrase applies, solving the sex issue solves other issues. What about the guys for whom it's not true though, the guys who are just fine with their sex lives but are genuinely unable to reconcile other problems in their relationships? They're ignored despite the fact that by definition they're the guys who need help.
Sure, a good sex life isn't going to solve major problems, such as abuse and the like, but for all the niggling things that are a part of any relationship, like bad habits and the like, if the man is getting plenty of sex he isn't going to give two shits about them.
When we got together as teenagers we had normal all the time sex. After a few years and a daughter my libido dropped to nearly nothing, even him pawing at me annoys me. He however would love to have sex at least every day. I don't even notice if month has gone by. We get along and actually only recently got married, we have been together for 9 years. So yeah it is a challenge for him and I want to want more sex for him but I don't I try but I just don't care. But after all that Sex is not the most important thing. It is great and wonderfull, and we are not going the way of seperate beds or anything, (I can't sleep well without him there) But since we love each other we get through it.
Is there any actual support for that, or is it just a catchy axiom?
Seems like it doesn't matter how great the sex is, if you can't stand to spend the rest of your time with the person you spend all of your time with, it's going to be Bad for the Relationship.
The people who say "if you really loved me" (male or female, in any context) never seem to realize that it's a two-way street, do they?
Exactly, because we love each other and want to spend time together the mis match in libido is more of the little problem than the other way around.
I think that could just be a case of spicing up your sex life though, even though it is slightly a cliche.
Why don't you try to find out what turns you on and then use whatever is neccessary? You said you want to want sex so do what you need to do.
That crap only exists because, GENERALLY, men's libido is higher than women's.
I think its true. I know it would apply to me.
But if the problems are so bad that you can't stand to spend "the rest of your time" with them, then I think that would qualify as a major problem, not a minor annoyance.
To clarify, when I say "minor annoyance", I mean things like eating too loudly, leaving dishes unwashed, long-ass showers using all the hot water (although for me personally thats a major annoyance), things like that.
She is 20, he is 18.
Well that's sort of the point. If you're compatible, with or without sex, then you're compatible. Sex isn't some magic guy-relationship-bullet.
Huh, could be a case of he's not sexually mature enough for her.
I still haven't had sex. I don't think it's that important in a relationship.
If you think relationships are 50% physical and 50% emotional then, yeah, sex will be important to you.
If you think relationships are 90% emotional and 10% physical then you'll probably be in a far better position when sex stops being interesting or when your cock stops working.
Just my opinion.
What is this jibber-jabber?
Yeah, I thought this when I was a virgin too.
My assumption is that if you continually have sex with the same person for 30 years it will be less interesting after 30 years than it was the first time.
That's not a universal rule, though.
Fair enough.
Evil new-speak.
I'll be fine, just give me a minute, a man's got a limit, I can't get a life if my heart's not in it.
Actually for a lot of people the first time sucks and things just keep getting better from there.
Interesting.