What men are thinking when making the move?

[Snipaa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomas

Is tickling another person also cheating? In a way it is physical contact with some pleasure involved..right?

A massage?

I'm thinking popular opinion will be.."No, those are okay"

Because sex is still taboo. Is there legitimate reasons as to why just plain sex is a deeper connection than other physically pleasurable acts? Just like kissing..it's the idea that we have that you only do it with your boyfriend/girlfriend..but that's dead now. Is sex headed this way too?

No way, atleast I hope not. Sex is the most intimate, and physical way to share yourself with your partner. There's so much emotion involved, I hope it never get to that.

[nomas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snipaa

No way, atleast I hope not. Sex is the most intimate, and physical way to share yourself with your partner. There's so much emotion involved, I hope it never get to that.

I'd like to think sex has nothing to do with sharing yourself and your love for your partner. It's just ONE act. I'm one to believe in the overall behavior towards the other person. How many nice things do you do for your partner? Are you always looking for his/her wellbeing before your own? Do you want to spend time/share experiences with this person? Do you share all your secrets with this person? That's the scale I would weigh a person's commitment towards me in. Without ever once having sex with her.

Of course..since most people don't think this way..if I love this person I would realize that she'd be hurt if I slept around, so I probably wouldn't be doing this. But my theories still make sense to me.

[artyemi]

there is a deeper connection associated with sexual relationship. it is something that is historically associated with marriage. And marriage, ah, an institution that has changed too much. We can't look at the connection associated with sexual relationship without looking at marriage.
Marriage old days- normally business transaction to join land, kindgom, etc., sex was used to create heirs, for power., normal to have many mistresses, wives...
Marriage modern dayish- love, people married because of love, thus you have sex with people you love. Still, you have to get married in order to have sex because if you don't, it would be embarrassing if you got pregnant or something.
Women's right movement: Birth control pills/Abortion- These free women to do what men have been doing for ages. Sex the way it is now.
And it would seem that sex is heading towards where kissing is heading.

See, you guys should be thankful for the women's right movement.

nomas- if you're in love with someone, don't you want that person all to yourself?
if you're in love with someone, don't you just want to give yourself to that person completely? share all these wonderful experiences with the person, and sex is to me the ultimate physical closeness that you can obtain with somebody else. Your body is united with another person. you can shake hands with anybody. you can touch someone's face. you can tickle someone, but they're all external. (except for kissing, i guess since the tongue is going into the other person's mouth.)

People are different. For me, when I am in love with someone, as in right now, I just don't have the interest in other people, in messing around, or whatever.

And I'm not concern about being sexual with him. I'm just happy that he took up my offer for a drink. But it turned into a full dinner.
And I'm happy.

[Fawn]

Well, they make sense so far...

I find the conversation becoming confusing though. There are so many questions!!!

In a way there are two types of sexual relationships. One type is the emotional & physical contact between two people that love and exclusively care for each other.

The second type would be the one night stand. The only "want" for sexual/physical satisfaction without any care or emotion towards that person. Percieving that person as only an object to fill your desires and wants.

Society has become a constant battle. With a perception of all guys are looking for sex, when in reality most men want an actual relationship before becoming physically intimate.

Confusing it is.

[artyemi]

and nomas- say you're in love with a girl, dating.. you guys live together.
but every night, she goes out and have sex with other guys. In fact, you two don't have sex at all. You just live together.
how do you feel?

[artyemi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fawn

Well, they make sense so far...

In a way there are two types of sexual relationships. One type is the emotional & physical contact between two people that love and exclusively care for each other.

The second type would be the one night stand. The only "want" for sexual/physical satisfaction without any care or emotion towards that person. Percieving that person as only an object to fill your desires and wants.

Fawn, I concur.
Type I for me:
1. that which is the result of your emotions (love) for the person (couples)

Type II
A. that which is the result of you being afraid of being alone (like companion- in this case, you're just a confused person who have no idea what exactly you want)
B. that which is the result of your physical needs (one-night stand)

[nomas]

Like I've said before, Arty..to me, love is totally unselfish. Yeah, I can want to have that person all to myself, but if I love them I let them be free. If they choose to be with me, then is when I want their companionship. Just like you say. If I love someone, I give myself entirely to this person. Just like you say, I have no need for other for anything romantic-emotional. But I do not expect it out of the other party. If she reciprocates this, not because there are rules we set, but because she want's to, that's the ideal relationship.

Now if she likes being with me and I like being with her but she doesn't want sex with me, but she wants to be satisfied sexually so she goes out every night to have sex, then slips back into my bed and we sleep together, wake up together, spend the day together and at night the process repeats itself...according to my theory, it's okay. HIGHLY unconventional, and easier said than done, but according to my theory I should be happy I have what is really important to me, right? Her preference on MOST things..just not the sexual one.

But, again, "sex" is still this big, MAJOR factor in relationships...as you ran down through history, you saw it's meaning change, albeit gradually. Because change is difficult. Most people resist it. They want the status quo, it's easier to just keep things as they are.."like we've always done it".. is there valid reasons behind it? Sometimes, but when there isn't we still only do things cuz "we've always done it this way" and there's no reason to change.

Maybe I've been too good at becoming a cold logical robot. Still, it's only thoeries I'm spitting out. I've yet to put it into practical practice and see if it works, and I'll likely never find someone radical enough to share my views who I also happen to be attracted to. So chances are I'll fall in love with someone in the mainstream and make my adjustments accordingly...because compromise comes with the territory anyway. We all give up something.

[Frasbee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by artyemi

If my heart is with someone, that's the only person I want to be with, the only person I think of being with, and I don't even think of being with just some random others. But again, that's just me.

You and the rest of society.

It's how we've been raised to think.

Along with idea that the best way to raise children is between a married heterosexual couple.

[nomas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frasbee

You and the rest of society.

It's how we've been raised to think.

Along with idea that the best way to raise children is between a married heterosexual couple.

I agree...

(it had been a while since I had gotten to use that old joke..)

[artyemi]

Nomas- Love is completely unselfish.
To be able to have the kind of relationship that you theorized is not impossible, but other feelings, emotions will come into play.
My theory is there is someone out there who will share that much love for you and you for them and that is what pushes the couple to be exclusive. There are no rules except that which is determined by the passion and the feelings that they have for one another.
I have discovered for myself that it is not enough for me to have the companionship of that person because that would mean that person may never be as happy as I am, or as content as I am. That companionship has to come with that person's passion. So I know that he will be as happy. Because if he chooses to be with me just so he won't be lonely, what happiness is there for him? If he chooses not to leave me because he is afraid of not finding another person, how satisfied will he be? I would be the selfish one in keeping the relationship going because i'm happy to have his companionship.
Either the person will share that much passion for me and be with me, or not share that passion and be my friend. I want the person's happiness in all its form, and I want to be the one to make the person happy in every way. You could have companionship with sex. But then, knowing that I could never make the person emotionally happy, what's the point?
Or just companionship, which could just be friendship.. I'll be content. Friends can do more things together.
But it just feels empty to have the companionship, friendship, sex without that little bit of passion... For me, it's just not enough.

[Snipaa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomas

I'd like to think sex has nothing to do with sharing yourself and your love for your partner. It's just ONE act. I'm one to believe in the overall behavior towards the other person. How many nice things do you do for your partner? Are you always looking for his/her wellbeing before your own? Do you want to spend time/share experiences with this person? Do you share all your secrets with this person? That's the scale I would weigh a person's commitment towards me in. Without ever once having sex with her.

Of course..since most people don't think this way..if I love this person I would realize that she'd be hurt if I slept around, so I probably wouldn't be doing this. But my theories still make sense to me.

You are right, but the physical part is what seaprates your mate from other really good/close female friends. I'm the type of person that would give the shirt off my back for my friends (female friends inc.) and will do my best to be there for any of my friends. But what sets the difference between my feelings for my female friends vs. G/F is the fact that I am physically attracted to her aswell, and my feelings of love are much deeper!

[nomas]

Ah..good point, Snipaa. There's a definite difference between male/female relationships because I, for one, am undoubtedly heterosexual and am not attracted nor do I even remotetly care to experience anything sexual or romantic with a male friend. A completely different case exists with my female friends. I claim I can be friends..and it's true..with girls, but I guess it will never be the same as with friends of my own gender. So there is a difference...BUT..where is the point where these differences began to lead to norms of society. That, Arty, is what I wonder. Where these rules got created and which make sense to me and why..not "just because".

And maybe this is where the concept of "love" plays in. Maybe it's easy to practice "free love" as in "free sex" when you're not in love, but bring love into the picture and everything changes.

I wouldn't know.

[artyemi]

nomas- i wouldn't know either, about love that is.

All I know is that we always look for reciprocation from the other party.

Why waste time in a relationship that only satisfy someone else?

Why bother with a friend who doesn't care about your feelings?

Why hang out with someone who's only going to make you feel lik crap?

[Frasbee]

Why eat an apple when you want a banana?

[nomas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frasbee

Why eat an apple when you want a banana?

Frisbee...I'll let you off the hook on this one because:
1. I like you and
2. It's too easy.