Love or Sex?

no because the fun part is practicing to get better

 

I still contemplate if a sexless relationship is possible. I think it could be possible but sex is one thing that makes a romantic relationship, isnt it? Anyways, Love is foremost important. I dont care whatsoever how they are in bed.

 

Bedroom problems will usually lead to other problems and the relationship will end. (My opinion)

Lots of people want to be able to say that they could do a sexless relationship, but i think it'd put too much strain on a blossoming relationship.

Now if you've been with someone for years and then something happened where they couldn't have sex anymore we have a completely different situation.

 

Sex is something you need to work at. Not everyone likes the same stuff. Talk, show, tell, teach.

 

I looked at the title and said, "Yes please." Evidently I never stopped being 13. =D

And... Well, I don't think I could be with someone who didn't want sex. And... No, I probably wouldn't be happy in a relationship with someone who, for some reason, couldn't have any kind of sex. I've never tried it, mind, and people are pretty creative at getting each other off, so it may well be that if I met someone with a disability that made sex difficult we could make it work. Buuuut this is theoretical on my part. I do think that people with any kind of libido at all need a healthy sexual element in a relationship to be satisfied. I know people who have no interest in sex, and that's their own business, but I wouldn't date any of 'em. But I might just be a horndog. =P

But if someone wants it and is just bad at it, I imagine you could learn and get better. I don't think "bad in bed" necessarily means "sexless relationship", it just means "there's room for improvement and I should probably talk to my partner about this." If you think someone's bad in bed and they're not satisfying you, you could, say, tell them what you like. You can't expect people to magically figure out the things that make you happy in bed. (... If we're talking about premature whatevers, though, I'm clueless, haha.)

Now, if they refused to do anything differently despite me saying that I wasn't satisfied with how things went in the bedroom, that might be cause for dumping. =P

 

Sex is sex plain and simple but there is no sex like the type of sex you can have with the one you love. If a relationship ends because of sex and nothing else then that probably means the relationship was based on sex and nothing else. I mean I want a man so I can date him, not just his penis. Isnt that what a relationship is for? dating a person and not their junk? I mean the junk can love you back but its got limits. Pretty soon the owner's going to want to talk with you and break you and the junk up...so you'll just play around with the owner to see the junk as much as possible, making the owner feel used. Did any of that make sense?

 

I did the same thing.

Oh, and I second what Jarrett said.

 

It probably depends on how big of a role sex plays in the relationship. If a couple has a healthy, well-rounded relationship, except the sex sucks, then the couple should at least work at it before they just break up. It could be a shared experience! Maybe try a book of positions (which I need to find, because how the hell to gay guys have sex?), or just experiment with sex toys or lubricants. If you don't improve, then improv: try dry humping or massaging!

Of course, if improving the sex becomes the focus of the relationship, then it might not be as fun. But just declaring a person unfit for sex and dumping them, that's pretty hasty.

...SEX!

 

There's always improvement when it comes to the bedroom. You don't have to give up sex if it's bad. Tell your babycakes what you do and don't like, introduce some different things to try.

The sex can't be THAT horrible for you to drop them at a dime, that's shallow. If so, the relationship wouldn't have lasted long even if the sex was good.

 

After rethinking this i must say
i don't think i'd ever reach the level of loving someone if they weren't giving me sex or were so terrible and unable to learn.

 

I don't think I could be in a celibate relationship either. I'd feel like something was missing, even though I'm a virgin.

 

No sex, no cigar in my opinion.

 

At my age, I could deal with a sexless relationship really. Later on, sex would probably be more important, but now, what I really want in a relationship is more just hugs and kisses rather than sex. Sex is like alloy wheels on a car for me, it'd be nice to have, but there's no really need for it for me. (Wow, that was a crappy metaphor! )

 

Personally I've only had loveless relationships... but never sexless
And they wern't too bad

 

i read an article about a couple who have been married for 60 years...











... wait for it...












AND HAVE NEVER HAD SEX!!!


personally though, it would be great to find someone who you love and is good in bed... but i wouldn't dump someone just because they werent mind-bogglingly awesome - i'd try and teach them what i liked to try and make them better. there is a thing called communication and it's highly underrated.

 

Love, I think now I have pritty much done both I could do fine without sex but Love I must have without it I am as I speak now.

 

if i had to choose it would be love... but practice makes perfect with sex

 

I agree with Stuart. I've never had sex. I don't know what I'm missing out on. Sure, I'd probably be curious, but if it's a choice between love and sex I would always choose love.