|
|
|
|
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/23/2008 8:33:36 PM | how many relationships do you think there are where sex just quietly left one day and oh well, we still love each other and are so happy? Do you think someone who doesn't want to arouse you is going to hold your hand and kiss you lovingly? Why would I enter into a relationship where we were miles apart of what we desire in that relationship? I've dated a man with a low libido, it was ugly, he accused me of doing everything from trying to force him to have sex and by gawd he didn't have to, to being some slut who was probably screwing the whole town. Now we could have all kinds of sex all kinds of different way but he was resentful as hell about what his challenges were and that I had a normal healthy libido. He became abusive and the resentment could be cut with a knife. Look up mismatched libido sites online, not that many people are happy with it at all and all that kissing & hugging, not usually happening but if it is, it's just more sexual frustration.
I'm sure there is a man out there who would click with me and we could over come all the challenges, but we'd have to both want to. Just how challenged is a person who can't have any kind of sexual activity? Very few, mostly it's that the person doesn't want to have sex with you and if you think that won't get to you, you are kidding yourself. I don't know about you but I don't have an on/off button where if he's kissing me and hugging me then what, rolls over and goes to sleep? I'm not able to kid myself that I wouldn't be miserable. Why would I enter into a relationship, on purpose, knowing we are going to be at odds on something so intimate, so important in a relationship?
Being in a relationship already and working through things is not the same a thinking well I'm not having sex now, so why not have a sexless relationship. Why not have a V-8 instead? For me anyway, it would be much healthier. Please give me credit for knowing myself well enough to not go where I know I would not want to stay.  | |
|
| |
| |
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 7:04:13 AM | Folks I think y'all are making a distinction that is not really there. In my mind there is no such thing as a relationship between a man and a woman that does not involve sex of some kind, except perhaps the relationship between a brother and a sister. The only relevant question is what kind of sex we are having and are we both happy with it? Wants, needs and abilities all change as we get older, I can tell you first-hand, but the basic desire is still there whether it is acted on or not.
I am with Daynadaze on this one. I spent some years lying next to a lady I desired that did not share the same interest. I am sure that was just as much my fault as hers, but even so I would not do that again. Touching between a man and a woman in a relationship is inherently sexual and I would not be in a relationship for long that did not include loving touch in some form or another. The rest is a matter of finding out what each can do to please and satisfy the other.
Y'all are not that far behind me in age and you better be thinking about being creative and flexible when your body or your partner's no longer does what it used to, at least not in the same way. It is not worse or better, just different. The fool spends their days bemoaning what they have lost, the wise person enjoys to the fullest what is left. | |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 7:20:40 AM |
In my mind there is no such thing as a relationship between a man and a woman that does not involve sex of some kind, except perhaps the relationship between a brother and a sister.
Never been in a marriage or other VLTR, I see.....
As I have said before, sex is the fast route to a serious relationship, serious relationships tend to be the route to essentially sexless relationships.
It is a well known social science observation that the more stable and committed a relationship is, the less frequent the sexual interactions within the relationship. Its just the way we are made. It is quite the usual result of some threat to a LTR, such as infidelity, sickness, absence, or physical violence of some kind that sexual activity immediately increases in frequency and intensity. Its just not true that a deep loving caring relationship implies an active sex life, at least not in the average case. | |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 7:37:43 AM | It's Not a *requirement*....
It's an Integral Part of a Loving Relationship...!!
If the 'Goal' is Sex....as in 'Dating'...then, it's a _Requirement_....
..but if, after years spent in a relationship....the Sex is STILL Great... 
then it should be viewed as the 'cement' that holds it together...stronger..!!
It's the Bonding Agent that keeps an otherwise weak relationship from falling apart..!!
. .   . . | |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 8:41:09 AM | Maybe it is me but I think what people are getting confused at is that a sexual "challenge" equates no form of intimacy or sexual contact at all. If this is true how do you explain the multitudes of people that have disabled partners, or partners that are impotent or a long term illness? There are people that form relationships under those conditions from the beginning and ones that stay when those conditions develop. They do exist, I see them all the time, have some in my own family. There are many forms of intimacy and sex other than complete penetration if that happens to be impossible for one of the partners. There are loving relationships out there without full fledged penetration sex they just work around it.
Of course there are people that leave or don’t bother under these same conditions but there are also many that leave a great sex partner because they happen to have huge problems in other areas.
| |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 8:58:20 AM |
..but if, after years spent in a relationship....the Sex is STILL Great...
then it should be viewed as the 'cement' that holds it together...stronger..!!
It's the Bonding Agent that keeps an otherwise weak relationship from falling apart..!!
That statement is so far off it's ridiculous, in my opinion.
Sex won't keep a relationship from falling apart. Unless you have other things besides sex to hold a relationship together, it just won't work.. I know .. from experience.
  | |
|
shimbo
|
Joined: 6/15/2008
Msg: 84 | |
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 9:22:48 AM |
Why would I enter into a relationship, on purpose, knowing we are going to be at odds on something so intimate, so important in a relationship?
That's an excellent question. And based on my own experience, there are many answers- "money", "security", "ignorance", "parenthood".
Please give me credit for knowing myself well enough to not go where I know I would not want to stay
That's a nice sentiment but I'd prefer to judge for myself.  | |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 11:48:15 AM | > It's refreshing for a man to agree that love is the main course and sex is the dessert.....
Marriage is like a feast where the appetizers are better than the main course and there is no dessert.
- Garrison Keilor's character Guy Noir in "The Prairie Home Companion"
HA!! | |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 12:27:06 PM |
love is the main course and sex is the dessert.....
Life is uncertain, have dessert first!
I have difficulty seeing relationship type love sustaining without some form of sexual expression in most cases. But then maybe, like the song says..."I ain't that lonely yet..."
Cindy O | |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 1:29:57 PM |
(Msg 84) .but if, after years spent in a relationship....the Sex is STILL Great...
then it should be viewed as the 'cement' that holds it together...stronger..!!
It's the Bonding Agent that keeps an otherwise weak relationship from falling apart..!! That statement is so far off it's ridiculous, in my opinion. Sex won't keep a relationship from falling apart. Unless you have other things besides sex to hold a relationship together, it just won't work.. I know .. from experience.
I find that illogical.
When two people first "connect" the focal point is sex. That's why there are so many references to the "honeymoon period".
I think most people can relate to their youth and the passion they felt for their first "lover" or the honeymoon period they may have experienced.
Dictionary. com defines honeymoon period as, "The honeymoon period is the phase early in a long-term relationship characterized by greater than typical joy and lesser than typical friction. Usually during this time there is much more physical contact between the two partners in the relationship."
"Much more physical contact". That is the secret. When there is much more physical contact there much more joy and much less friction.
The "average" honeymoon period is said to be six months. During that time both people work, take care of regular day-to-day business.....in other words it's not any different than what they did before or after except for the fact there was physical contact with another human being. As the contact lessened the "other things" came into focus. Then the disagreements and problems arose.
That's why sex is considered the glue that holds romantic relationships together. Whether it's because the physical contact results in us looking at our partner in a different light or switches our focus away from differences or enables us to acknowledge that differences don't matter.....the point is anyone who has gone through a honeymoon period knows it works.
So, the question is why would someone abandon something that they know works? Are their lives too busy so they don't make time? Do they have a hormonal imbalance resulting in a lack of desire?
I would guess most people participating in this thread have, at one time, experienced a "honeymoon period". So, I put forward the following questions, "Did you notice a difference during that period as far as getting along with your partner? When your relationship collapsed did you notice you were having sex less frequently? Finally, if you answered the preceding questions in the affirmative wouldn't it be logical to conclude that sex is the glue that bonds two people? | |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 1:40:26 PM | Dave, I have read what you said and totally understand what you mean. Back when I
was married, I always felt so much closer to my ex after spending time being physical with each other. However, *sigh*, that faded away and I felt much more alone, disengaged from him so to speak. Found myself pining for that "physical" connection we once had, as most else was already lost at that time. To say that sex is the glue that holds things together? I think I would have to disagree on that one. In my case, it was pretty much all that was left and I remember at one point, thinking, OMG, even this has gone down the tube as I felt nothing at all when with him at the time. I truly believe that it is the "combination" of the emotional and the physical that keeps it together, keeps the parties close to each other. jmho | |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 2:04:54 PM | Msg 81
As I have said before, sex is the fast route to a serious relationship, serious relationships tend to be the route to essentially sexless relationships.
It is a well known social science observation that the more stable and committed a relationship is, the less frequent the sexual interactions within the relationship. Its just the way we are made. It is quite the usual result of some threat to a LTR, such as infidelity, sickness, absence, or physical violence of some kind that sexual activity immediately increases in frequency and intensity. Its just not true that a deep loving caring relationship implies an active sex life, at least not in the average case.
Can you cite me the studies done on this that came up with these findings, I can't find any. | |
|
shimbo
|
Joined: 6/15/2008
Msg: 90 | |
| |
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 3:05:04 PM | It is a chicken-egg question regarding what holds a relationship together. A relationship stays together when all aspects are working well. Take away any aspect and the relationship is threatened. Either that aspect gets restored or the other aspects begin to also decline.
I am, in fact, a social scientist and I do not believe for a moment the assertion that sexual frequency declines in direct relation to the stability and commitment of a relationship. I would be very surprised if a stable relationship does not have a stable freequency of sexual interaction. If not, then it is isn't stable, is it? I do know that sexual interaction decreases once children enter the picture. I do know that it sometimes increases again when children leave the house. I do know that when one or both partners detach from a relationship, sexual interaction declines to somewhere between very little and none at all.
I have read more studies of satisfaction than frequency. They are correlated but not identical. I submit that if both partners are genuinely satisfied, frequency is irrelevant.
What this has to do with the topic at hand is beyond me. | |
|
| |
shimbo
|
Joined: 6/15/2008
Msg: 93 | |
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 3:18:15 PM |
I submit that if both partners are genuinely satisfied, frequency is irrelevant
If both partners are satisfied, then obviously the correct frequency is happening.
That doesn't mean that frequency is irrelevant.
However, I'll concede that frequency isn't the most important trait.
Variety is! | |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 3:48:45 PM | RE: Msg 89.
I see sex as a form of communication. If partners talked every evening about their day, say for half an hour, they would have a much better relationship than if they just spoke on a Saturday night. I think that's what happens where sex is concerned.
While I'm not necessarily advocating daily sex I feel people let too much time pass between occasions so there is naturally a disconnect. Also, if sex becomes a rare happening, I believe people put too much emphasis on performance.
It's the physical contact that is important. Like a hug, so to say. As it decreases people tend to become more "shy" or awkward about it. Also, there is the habit of people saying/thinking, "Is that all the person wants?" as if there is something inherently wrong with sex.
Picture a woman saying to her husband, "I'd like us to spend a quiet evening at home tonight" and the husband thinks, "I know what she's up to. She wants to talk!" 
Any relationship I've been in the sex decreased before any problems arose. It wasn't intentional. A new job. A new hobby. Maybe even a new TV show one evening.
Too tired. Too busy. Sex always seemed to take last place and we see that from many viewpoints expressed right here whether it's people feeling it's necessary to be "in the mood" or others referring to it as a dessert. Just the way they refer to it shows the lack of importance they place on it.
As I mentioned on other threads shortly after my partner and I met she asked what I expected from a relationship. I immediately answered, "Sex!" We both laughed and she said she couldn't see that being a problem. I countered that it wasn't a problem now. My concern was 10 years from now. Sex was vital to a healthy realtionship and couples must make time for it.
As what happens to all couples there are times when our lives got busy and sex took a back seat. The problem was solved when, one Sunday afternoon, my partner headed towards the bedroom and said, "We have some catching up to do." 
It's 12 years we've been together and we've never forgotten the importance of sex. IMO, it's the ultimate "touching base" with ones partner. If one has any sense of awareness they can tell if their partner is "into it". If not, that's the time to inquire why. It's the perfect barometer to measure the state of a relationship.
EDIT: Msg 92
What this has to do with the topic at hand is beyond me.
It has to do with why sex is a solid requirement. If one is single and happy without sex, fine. In most romantic relationships sex is a big thing. For those who disagree then I assume they wouldn't mind if their partner partook with the local waitress/secretary/neighbor. | |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 3:51:53 PM |
However, I'll concede that frequency isn't the most important trait.
Variety is!
If both partners are satisfied it is cause they have WORKED at making the relationship be about THEM vs one party. It is the communication, the things you say and do, that makes this part of being with someone so untouchable the idea of being in a sexless relationship is something most of us wont consider.
Personally I agree with quality over quanity...well actually a bit of both /wink. | |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 3:57:07 PM |
It is a well known social science observation that the more stable and committed a relationship is, the less frequent the sexual interactions within the relationship.
Think quality not quantity.
Its just not true that a deep loving caring relationship implies an active sex life, at least not in the average case. If one partner is deeply dissatisfied with the quantity and/or quality of the sex life...the 'deep loving caring' relationship is gonna sustain damage. The exception would be,of course, illness or disability of one ot the relationship partners. Even then sometimes that love gets rather frayed around the edges.(Right or wrong, the non ill partner is only HUMAN)
It would seem to me that some of the referenced "threats" to the relationship would result in decrease or even cessation of sexual activity provided that the partner who was being cheated on or treated with violence had any backbone whatsoever.
Cindy O | |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 4:41:14 PM | Online you have:
a) men looking for women who like sex
b) women looking for men who want something other than sex
Sex is clearly the bone of contention. Ha ha. Bone.
What would online personals look like if men and women wanted the same thing?
When men and women both hold their ground, there is no common ground. There are only coffee grounds as separately they go around and around, meeting for coffee, not getting laid, not finding The One. Holding out for someone who isn't holding out.
 | |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 4:51:02 PM | Gasoline. That is what a relationship is. At first whoosh! Hot lust and the fumes burn all over the place, when the fumes start disappearing the fire stops burning. When all the gasoline fumes are gone, nothing will burn.
(Gasoline produces ignitable vapors that are 3 to 4 times heavier than air and can travel for great distances along the ground. ) | |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 4:53:24 PM |
a) men looking for women who like sex
b) women looking for men who want something other than sex
Women do like sex, I love sex....but sexual chemisty is only part of a relationship. You have to be compatible outside of the bedroom to.. oh wait!
Actually in the world today compatible in the bedroom seems hard to find!...maybe the men are on to something /snicker ...just kidding Ladies!!!!!!!!!
I have talked to men who say they want to be appreciated for who they were to outside of the bedroom, I dont think it is a matter of Men and Women wanting different things...it is finding the one person who wants what you want....then the sky is the limit!
However the fishing pond is so big that while you are unhooking the last fish that you caught and then realized wasnt a keeper...the one you want might have just gotten hooked by someone else and now you have to wait for them to release it...so you cast again and hope /sigh...maybe you can munch on some chips and salsa while you wait :P
I want a man to treat me right, who has the ability to stimulate my brain, can carry on a conversation about basically anything/everything, GREAT SENSE OF HUMOR required, who while may have had things happen before in his life hasnt allowed them to close him off from a real connection....Give me that and I guarantee the man will always be smiling :P | |
|
| You've been THIS long without sex, why is it still a solid requirement?
Posted: 6/24/2008 5:14:33 PM |
women looking for men who want something other than sex
No, that's not a correct assessment. We are looking for men who want sex within the context of caring and stable relationships. But that takes a man with a BACKbone. Apparently a significant portion of 45+ males lost theirs in the divorce.
Anyway, the premise of the OT was exactly the opposite. The question was posed that since a fair number of mature singles may have not had much in the way of sex for awhile, why is it still a required element of the "good" relationship we all seek. The question was not directed to either gender, and believe it or not, it is NOT just women looking for a "sexless relationship".
To me,sexless relationship=opposite gender roommate.
And I can concede that "sex" doesn't need to be standard garden variety if there are obstacles. But to be with someone and not have that outlet for expression,of giving one another pleasure,(whatever way you can get it done),just doesn't make much sense to me.
Cindy O | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
