posted January 20, 2012 03:41 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Venus:
1) no one demonized sex on this topic

2) so 75% for sex and 25% for all the rest (?) so if say somewhere in the middle of the relationship your partner becomes incompetent (say for medical reasons that cant be reversed) then you dump his/her a$$ ?

---

I beg to differ, there's a huge hostility regarding sexual compatibility on most of these posts, namely the way the second part of your post is phrased. Obviously a mutual relationship starts off with compatibility on most fronts depending on what you value and what you happen to need, which you state when you first start dating someone. For me to have a perfect score across the board with someone but a lack of sexual chemistry, something would just always feel "off" for me. You could continue dating that person and denying that vital part of yourself, but SOMEWHERE down the line all of that frustration is going to come to a boiling point and need and outlet somewhere. It's just a matter of understanding yourself and not wanting that to happen, so you nip it in the bud when you're sifting through people in the dating period.

posted January 20, 2012 10:47 PM            

Dude, your point is noted. Relax ok? Its not that great a deal.

I married my wife without having had sex with her. She was 25 when she got married and she was chaste. And we didn't live in bum f@sk nowhere: New York City (you mentioned that its archaic to be 20 years old and not to have had sex in LA). Since marriage, we have been blessed with the joys of sex, and she has turned out to be quite a handful.

Anyway, don't you think it's kind of abrupt to tell a girl.. "hey, I've gotta test drive you ..." If you were dating a girl and both of you are in absolute love, would you ditch the girl just because she can't perform to your standards?

posted January 21, 2012 09:49 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by YoursTrulyAlways:
JFK,

Dude, your point is noted. Relax ok? Its not that great a deal.

I married my wife without having had sex with her. She was 25 when she got married and she was chaste. And we didn't live in bum f@sk nowhere: New York City (you mentioned that its archaic to be 20 years old and not to have had sex in LA). Since marriage, we have been blessed with the joys of sex, and she has turned out to be quite a handful.

Anyway, don't you think it's kind of abrupt to tell a girl.. "hey, I've gotta test drive you ..." If you were dating a girl and both of you are in absolute love, would you ditch the girl just because she can't perform to your standards?

I dread the day when I become impotent, and I can see it happenning down the road. 40% of guys become impotent by 40 years old, and the percentage just grows with age. But its nature and an uncontrollable aspect of life.

---

I'm perfectly relaxed and have been throughout this thread, only exasperated. I never said that everyone needs to "test drive" their future spouse, only that sex happens to be a vital part of my life and yeah, I would definitely rather test drive. Honestly, just because everything happened to work out like a fairy tale and mostly idealistic in your relationship doesn't mean that's even close to being the norm, that's obvious enough to point out.

And when you're in a natural, chill dating experience with another person, you don't need to blatantly say you need to bone to decide the future of this relationship. It's all about letting everything take its natural course. Subtlety.

posted January 21, 2012 08:17 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by mockingbird:
It seems like the thread has moved beyond this, but my answer to the first question:

When both partners are satisfied, it's between 10 and 20%.
When one or both aren't, it's more like 80%*

* Dissatisfaction can have myriad roots and just as many remedies.

---

posted January 21, 2012 08:21 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by mockingbird:
RP - I don't think it's unwise, either, in either "direction". If two people aren't sexually in sync, they're not sexually in sync.

The point I was working towards is that I would no more question a celibate person's choices than I would those of someone for whom sex is an integral part of a romantic relationship.

Edited to add: Similary, if someone recognizes that mutual monogamy is (or isn't) a priority for them, it would be unfair (to all involved) of them to enter into a romantic relationship with someone with stated inverse priorities.

---

posted January 23, 2012 03:01 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by JohnFKennedy:
I beg to differ, there's a huge hostility regarding sexual compatibility on most of these posts, namely the way the second part of your post is phrased. Obviously a mutual relationship starts off with compatibility on most fronts depending on what you value and what you happen to need, which you state when you first start dating someone. For me to have a perfect score across the board with someone but a lack of sexual chemistry, something would just always feel "off" for me. You could continue dating that person and denying that vital part of yourself, but SOMEWHERE down the line all of that frustration is going to come to a boiling point and need and outlet somewhere. It's just a matter of understanding yourself and not wanting that to happen, so you nip it in the bud when you're sifting through people in the dating period.

Now, if I fell in love with someone and then they became disabled down the line, that's a different story all together. Obviously there would be a denial of needs on both parts, which is just different and unconditional love takes place from there on.

---

i would never demonize sex or deny its in-evitable existance in romantic relatioships, i am a scorpio venus afterall.. i want sex like every other gal/guy out there but that doesnt mean its what im pursuing and its not the only outlet for your emotions.. that being said i completly understand and relate that people do use sex as a gateway from the roughness of life and everyday routine

you're right about the "unconditional love" thing, sexless relationships are not for everyone thats for sure, but they can and do exist and THAT is the only point im trying to prove...

posted February 08, 2012 06:49 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by YoursTrulyAlways:
I can't see it being very important, and I'll rate it a [b]50%. My Mrs. would rate it 100% 24/7/365. [/B]

---

lol..