Love or sex?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 14, 2008 12:07 PM GMT
    Your in a relationship with a guy that loves you with all his heart. He treats you like gold but is either not sexual enough or sexual at all, would you stay in the relationship?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 14, 2008 2:46 PM GMT
    That was almost my situation when I first started my realtionship. Neither one of us were big tops. There was a lot of fourplay and oral sex. Now we have a healthy sex life. Bottoms became tops. We just worked it out.
  • zakariahzol

    Posts: 2241

    Jul 14, 2008 3:35 PM GMT
    No, sex is important part of a relationship. I will not be faithful to anybody who cant sexually satisfies me.
  • gumbosolo

    Posts: 382

    Jul 14, 2008 3:35 PM GMT
    As the not extremely sexual guy (though that might change with the right person), I hope someone will say yes . . .
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 14, 2008 3:37 PM GMT
    Yes, if he cuddles really well. icon_biggrin.gif
  • gumbosolo

    Posts: 382

    Jul 14, 2008 3:38 PM GMT
    Sedative saidYes, if he cuddles really well. icon_biggrin.gif


    SCORE!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 14, 2008 3:40 PM GMT
    no, a relationship requires both. i've dated guys before who were 'good guys' but for whom either i wasn't physically attracted to them, or the sex was horrible, due to incompatibility issues or differing sex drives, etc.

    in my experience, a guy can be great on paper, and even treat you really well and be 'right' in many ways, but if you don't get butterflies around him and want to jump his bones, its all gonna burn up in your eventual frustration with the situation. its really the common sense reverse of the opposit scenario- a guy you're crazy-in-lust after, but who treats you like crap and has an aweful personality.

    you can't have one without the other- and hope for it to be a full and healthy pairing.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 14, 2008 3:41 PM GMT
    Wow, that's a tough one. Love is necessary but sex helps keep that love alive. I don't believe you can have a meaningful relationship without love but you can without sex, albeit difficult to maintain some monogamous commitment. Balance would be the key, that's what I'm looking for. Someone who loves me enough to come up behind me, wrap his arms around me and tell me, then onto the counter, oh sorry...fantasy world.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 14, 2008 3:43 PM GMT
    My relationship is just that but love is more important and a good person also and as for sex well its just relief!
    You may find a real sexual partner but is bad in other ways and I have been there! I am sexual but my b/f is not big on it so whatever I say.

  • dfrourke

    Posts: 1062

    Jul 14, 2008 4:06 PM GMT
    well, I know I have written this somewhere before...

    I need both, but it's no mystery that my sex drive has taken a dive as I have gotten older...it's also a reason why I need to keep finding ways to keep it interesting the longer I am with someone...my mom told me once:

    "if you put a marble in a jar for every time you had sex with the person you are dating in that first year...and then after the first year, you removed a marble every time you had sex with the [same] person...you would never empty the jar"

    ...things change...relationships become more work...life gets in the way...if that's happening there may be some value in trying to work around those issues...if I never had both love and sex with someone, I probably wouldn't stay...

    - David
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19136

    Jul 14, 2008 4:15 PM GMT
    Personally, the love part is more important. Sex is great, but I don't necessarily need a partner to satisfy that drive ;-) That being said, I can handle the sex being less than perfect, as long as the "intimacy" is still there. Without intimacy, you may as well be single.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 14, 2008 4:25 PM GMT
    Yeah, I think the love is more important. Sex (whatever that may entail) can come later.



  • ChrisRo

    Posts: 5

    Jul 14, 2008 5:47 PM GMT
    Personally I think all relationships start off with a bang and as you get older you realize that sex is not everything in the relationship. You may miss it or have opposing desires, but loving relationship can exist without the sex.

    I noticed that most of the younger guys stating that sex was more important. I am curious to hear the views of other 40 and above RJs that are in a monogamous relationship.

    Chris (ChrisRo)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 14, 2008 5:52 PM GMT
    My last relationship ended largely due to sexual incompatibility and completely different takes on what being sexual in a relationships means.

    So I now think sex is more important to a relationship than I previously did. Even if both parties don't find sex that important and live a relatively low-sex lifestyle - that mutual understanding is of enormous impact.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 14, 2008 5:58 PM GMT
    i guess i'm lucky ...

    i have both ...

    my bf loves ...

    and my bf is very sexual to me ...

    when i'm with my bf, he always attacks me ... sexually, of course ...

    specially when my bf sees me naked, he starts to kiss me ... all over ...

    and we always end up having "wild hot porn star sex" ...

    cheers !!! icon_biggrin.gif
  • twentyfourhou...

    Posts: 243

    Jul 14, 2008 6:26 PM GMT
    I have tried one without the other before. So based on personal experience, i am no longer willing to compromise. The emotional and physical attraction must BOTH be there. It must be one complete package.