ok this really bothers me I just had to make a thread! I hate how people get the idea that a relationship is so much about sex and nothing more! ??? I am not sure where this idea came from and it seems very stereotypical! I was with a guy who said to me and I quote "sex is 85% of a total relationship" Ok this dude needs to get his head examined! : Love is not about sex but sex is a part of love maybe! I am not even sure if I agree with sex! I mean because I use different termonology for what I consider to be sex but then it is not even sex to me It is making love because you see there is a big difference between making love and having sex! You all may not agree and that is ok! I just needed to voice my thoughts on this! They are two completly diffrent things but yet they entertwine somehow! Ok

if a guy is committed to you he will make love to you if he just wants to get laid he will have sex with you!

If a guy wants to share his soul with you he will make love to you! if he just wants a place to blow his load he will have sex with you!

If a guy wants to share his inner most desires and dreams with you he will make love to you.....

If a guy wants to put you on his tallie card to show to his friends he will have sex with you!

If a guy wants to express his inner most feelings he will make love to you

If he just wants to pass the time away until he wants another beer he will have sex with you!



If a guy says he would rather have sex then make love to you... please run the other direction


Making love is the the uniting of two souls forever!

having sex is a sport were there is no winner or no common goal except getting screwed!!!!!

The basis of any relationship should NOT be sex! It should be trust and committment among many other things but never sex!

Hugs,
Chrissy

;)You go girl, you hit the nail right on the head my friend men seem to have a misunderstanding of what it is that we woman really want.  You see i'm one for knowing the person inside out knowing the soul, how they think, and how they feel i need a mental connection and lots of passion and desire not just sex i love to take my time and that means making love not having sex.!  So chrissy i strongly agree with you on everything you said.  Thanks for clearing this up so that men know what woman really and truely desire! your friend til the end kimberly-gloryoflove29

wow lol.. i really do agree with you.. only lol i mean i agree with sex i mean i havent done it before but im sure it can be pleasurable... ya no?? lol yea well i mnea making love is a lot better then having sex, or being a good fuck lol which i tihnk is all anyone would like about me.. but i do think that sex is sometihng you should do after marriage ROoze*

if a guy wants nothing more than a good f**ck he needs to get a blow up doll ok!!!!!!! : I mean come on! get real Haha! Thanks you guys for your response on this! agree making love is something that should be nurtured and handled with care none of this wham bam thank you mam! or get on and get the F*ck off women are not sex machines a guy can stick his di** into to get his thrill then move on!!!! Haha more later! Women need love compassion and tenderness not just a workout!!!! Hahaha! More later!

Love always,
Chrissy

Yea making love is something that should be reserved for after marriage Rooze! You are a good person to feel that way! but sadly many of us never wait! I wish I did only because the guy I gave my virginity do was a major d**ckhead Haha sorry bout my language! I strongly believed in waiting to have sex until I was marryied and was blanltly told if i dind't have sex he would find someone else I wish now i laughed in his face and told him go right ahead! He was like your only be avirgin until your 30 cuz he never wanted to get married He was not a committed person at all! He wanted to live with me have sex with me but never EVER be committed to me! Making love is sacred Sex just happens at least for me it did and I wish it never did not with the prick Iwas with! >:( He made me so mad!

Love always,
Chrissy

yea lol haha i feel the same way and dont worry about your :langusge: befcasue when i get mad i do teh same thing only i dont bloick em out lol.. and uh yea lolwell... im really sorry about that guy.. but i owuld love you lose my virginity to Jason becasue im in love lol how many times do you hear that... ROoze* :-*

A real man wants to make love to his woman; to worship and honor her as the truly beautiful being that she is. Any man that does not believe in this is just a 'guy.'

Okay...this one is a little weird. My reaction was quite different.  Sex to me, I have to have in a relationship.  I'm female and I'm pretty sure that I need sex just as badly as he does.  But i'm not doing it just to do it...I do it because it's healthy. (well, at least I get a work out)

Sex is also a part of love. Without sex, we might just all become Shakers.  And dammit, I don't wanna be a Shaker.  To me, I enjoy life, I embrace it. Sex is life.  It is creation.  Without sex, where do I begin?  

I don't mean have sex every day.  (although.... ) And I don't mean be a slut.  But, if he's a good one, (not necessarily THE one) why waste an event that you might not ever get the chance of having again.  I just don't view females that have sex with people as sluts unless they present themselves as one.  I'm not so sure that makes total sense...but that's okay.

just thought I would comment.

this is a bit of a touchy subject to me...my thoughts contradict themselves when im on this topic...sex...like you said is the common kind that is for a guy to get their *ick wet...but the whole making love thing? i think youre right...it is when two people truly love each other and want to express their love towards one another...(trying to be careful what i say...) anyway imma leave this convo for a while
love always
britt

Sex is the last thing I think about.







Everynight!
Best regards, Bill.
I wish it were - it's just a saying I once heard. It applies equally well to money, don't you think?
Think of the poor people for whom it's true.

thank you, +Franziska, for your stimulating thoughts on the matter.  I agree with almost all of what you say, and also a great deal with what Huyana said.

On the relation between romantic love and sex, while sex may not be the basis for many types of love, it nonetheless is an almost necessary component for romantic love, at least for me.  Of course, we can love friends and family in a non-sexual way, but this isn't the type of love I'm talking about.   I'm somewhat hesitant about saying that romantic love can exist without sex, because then the question becomes of whether it's really romantic love or something else.   For instance, when you first meet someone you're very attracted to, before having sex with them, more often than not, you experience some degree of infatuation which may easily be misinterpreted as romantic love (and which undoubtedly also includes lust).    No doubt a lot of good romantic and sensual poetry was written during the experience of infatuation, but we should bear in mind that often this experience also involves a mis-interpretation of infatuation for romantic love, unless you're sufficiently honest with yourself to recognize your emotional state for what it really is, infatuation.    Nonetheless, while infatuation is not the same as romantic love, it is an interesting state, a state that often coincides with increased creativity, particularly concerning romantic and sensual-related works, like romantic and sensual poetry.  At least that's been my experience with infatuation.   Romantic love, on the other hand, is much more enduring than infatuation, but does not strike one with the urgency and enhanced creativity that infatuation does.  Hence, I get married, and suddenly my creative poetic output dwindles to zero.  Is this a coincidence?  No.  Creative poetry writing often necessitates particular types of intensely emotional experiences, and while I still experience intensely emotional experiences, they aren't the same type of experience I'd had during periods of creative poetry writing.  Infatuation is, without a doubt, an intensely emotional experience conducive for creative poetry writing.  You write poetic masterpieces to catch your "lovers" attention (I put this in quotes because it's not really valid to refer to the object of your infatuation as your "lover" since love is not being experienced here, but merely infatuation), but once you've won over your "lover", the urgency to write creatively oftentimes diminishes.

Hence the many mistresses of artistic geniuses, I suppose!  They needed someone 'new' to get infatuated with and keep them inspired.

But, I seem to be drifting here, so let me go back to the original topic of the relation between sex and love.  Nietzsche once said that love is a transcendental form of sex, or something to that effect, meaning that the relation between the two is very close, but that love is a higher form than sex.    It's hard to think about experiencing legitimate romantic love for someone without sex, but let's try.  So, let's imagine the relationship is sensual, but does not include sex (oral, manual, coital), then the question is whether it's possible to experience romantic love for that person.   I think it is, if the sensual component of relationship involves touching (nonsexual), holding, kissing, and also involves emotional closeness.  Thus, sex is not necessary for romantic love, but in the most intense forms of romantic love, I'd think that sex, in the great majority of cases, needs to be involved.

What about just sex, without romantic love, without attachment, without strings attached, just a purely sensual experience, how many people are uninhibited enough for this and capable of this?   Is just sex, without romantic love, wrong?   What could be wrong with purely sensual experience?  

I think both romantic love and sex involve sharing part of yourself with another.   With sex, you're sharing your sensuality and physical body, whereas with romantic love, you're sharing your emotions, your heart, your mind, your innermost being (to the extent that it can be shared).   Sex and romantic love ultimately about different types of sharing of yourself, I think.   However, if you're comfortable sharing yourself with others, then what does that say about Victorian sexual inhibitions and, for that matter, monogamy?   But now I see I'm treading on volatile ground, and so I'll stop here, for now.

There are so many taboos about sex, even nowadays.  You'd think that we, as a society, would've gotten past all of it by now....but they're still there for the most part.


take care,
Shawn

It's all up to you as an individual and the way you want to approach it - it's subjective. If you're out for a 'good fuck' go out and find someone else who thinks the same, and do it. If people judge you for it, ignore them - it's your choice. Similarly, if you want to wait until you're married, go ahead, just don't tell others that their way is inferior to yours or wrong. 'One mans meat is another mans poison.'

Oh, I forgot - see Robert Heinlein's 'Stranger in a Strange Land' for a great read and a very interesting take on sexual mores.

CHRISSY I MOST TOTALY AGREE WITH U AND FOR ALL THOSE WHO OBJECT U ARE SICK FOR EXAMPLE SAY U HAVE A PROBLEM WITH YOUR SEXUAL ORGAN AND U BASICALLY CANNOT HAVE INTERCOURSE AND THAT PERSON STICKS AROUND THAT IS LOVE SEX IS NOT A LOVE AND SEX SHOULD BE MADE WITH ONLY WITH WHOM YOU ARE INLOVE

please do not post in ALL CAPS

i think we humans lower our selfs with the notion that sex is suposed to be a pleasrable activity, where in reality sex is a reproductive exercise.
we have sex, we reproduce.
this bussiness with make it last, more foreplay, where are trying to get to, the climax! whether we come after 5 mins or 1 hour is not relevant, the climax is still the same,

[quote author=akhtar link=board=22;threadid=2237;start=0#msg13656 date=1063319999]
i think we humans lower our selfs with the notion that sex is suposed to be a pleasrable activity, where in reality sex is a reproductive exercise...... whether we come after 5 mins or 1 hour is not relevant, the climax is still the same,
[/quote]

I don't think we need to lower ourselves with such notions. Sex is what we make of it. It can be animalistic, mystical, romantic, whatever we desire. In my opinion, climax should not be the primary objective of sex, because then one loses out on being in the moment. It is the journey, the being in the moment (both within oneself and intimately with another), the riding of the wave, that matters. Climax, to the extent that it signals the end of such a wonderful experience (unless you're going the multi-orgasmic route), is rather something to try to put off or hold off on, so as to allow one to be more in the moment.

sex is a journey, a journey to where?
is not the climax the destination? one takes a journey in order to get from a to b, surely the shortest route to the destination is the best or would you rather take the long route?.
pleasure is a figment of our imagination, we try make this life more bearable by deluding ourselves by constructing ways of pleasuring ones self with illusions, how can one live life to the full when death hangs over you like a shadow, surely our goal should be to evolve beyond these carnal pleasures, you talk of a journey, life is the journey! isn't this goal which is above all others.
these other illusions we make up are just a hinderance.

Hey Gang,

I'm late but had something I wanted to throw in. It isn't so much about the roles we play though. Everybody, after all, is entitled to come up with their own definition of how love and sex mix. We can all disagree, yet still be right.

Let's just pray to God for all of us that when we match with a partner we do so with someone who shares our view.

That said, I do have a personal pet peave of sorts. It has to do with a common experience I think where one person judges the relationship of another. And the thing is, I think this can come about in the most simple of ways.

For instance, I've often heard folks use the expression, "Oh - they aren't in love. They're just in lust." And what I wanna know from anyone who has ever said that is, "What kinda dogma have you been listening to?" lol

It kinda makes me want to rant, to which I would add..

My karma is about to eat your dogma..

The capacity to experience the fire and lightening of romantic love is one of the greatest gifts God ever gave us. We can throw that away if we want and opt for relationships built on reason, but IMHO I don't think that is very much living up to our promise. In fact, I see that as dead wrong, I would add to that the notion that we should not throw lust away either.

The attraction between a man and woman while in a state of 'in loveness' is one of the most beautiful elements of love and we do not become a better person or a more loving person by supressing that. Male and Female, He created both of them, and IMHO this is not something that is supposed to be repressed, nor is it a good measure by which to judge the relationship of another.

I disagree that sex is a necessary component for romantic love. Sex is a way of expressing experience of the ultimate togetherness, which is called love. But the problem arises because when people do enter into a relationship with others. They turn them into roommates, butlers, maids, and personal counselors, dumping ground because of dumping their emotions, all kinds of other garbage on them.

In relationships people tend to make love like a book, or a magazine that lies around in the house. At some point, when we happen to be in the mood to do so. Sometimes we might reach over, but have no plans to reach for.

We should be experiencing each other in its very uniqueness, by loving him or her. But when we use others for pleasure/sex, is there love? When people aim for pleasure by the means of sex in a romantic love, they will miss it. If we aim at love, and we see the essential traits, features in the beloved person, not sex, then sex and pleasure will follow in its natural course.

[quote]I disagree that sex is a necessary component for romantic love.[/quote]

Hey Shout,

touche.. I can agree with that. Rumi comes to mind very quickly. I can think of many other examples where this might apply. And I can also think perhaps of a million ways sex could be misused, as it frequently is.

Still, however, I can not envision a mature - capable, romantically in love couple that did not want to have sex. I also can not envision a 'mature romantically in love couple' who would view making love as being used.

If that be the case, I'm not sure what one would call it. There are always differnet strokes for different folks and maybe some folks actually do see celibacy as their romantic ideal. But for me personally, that would be the sounding bell to get the hell out of Dodge.

Fast

sex is a reproductive process, nothing more nothing less.
sex has nothing to do with love,
love is meeting someone talking, going out, getting along, going through good and bad times, helping each other,comforting each other etc.
now sex, what is it, enjoyment well yes but it is only temporal, we are constantly going towards the joys of today forgetting tomorrow,
in this society we are told what to think, we are told that sex is a vital part of loving, i dont think so!

hi akhtar,

it seems strange that you dont think sex is important part of love. Is it because you dont have sex with the person you love?

you are right, i dont have sex that often, i do enjoy sex very much but i dont agree its a vital part of a relationship, if your relationship is based on sex then where do you go when the going gets tough,
love is to talk with your partner, understand him or her, love them for what they are not whats in his or her pants,
why do you think the divource rate is so high, lust gives you a real buzz, you feel like your in heaven, it never lasts.

what have I done start a war heheh seriously though sex is actual act but without passion love and desire it is dry......


I will leave you with these thoughts

I don't care what is "in his pants" but what is in his heart
and I don't have sex no more
I don't believe in it
I would only make love
so come on let us all make love
not war
find the right one
and use protection
mostly for you heart!
;D

Love is Everything,
Chrissy

Wow, I see this subject has hit a nerve in some people. I think it is pretty easy to explain. I have been married for 13 years and yes having sex is great fun if both parties look at it as just that SEX. Nothing more, nothing less. Making love is a exploration of both people and the feelings, likes, dislikes, duel satisfaction, tenderness, touching, feeling, looking into each other eyes, and all that good stuff. But I will tell you after you have been married for awhile you still make love but most of the time it turns into just plain sex. The sharing of fantisies, and roll playing and other things to spice things up. I know there will be one person out there that will say, you shouldn't have to spice things up to make love. Well I say that person has never been married more than five minutes. Sex is great, Love making is better but join the two together and you have Heaven.

Chrissy,
I agree about your thought about caring what is in his heart.

You don’t believe in sex? You sound like it’s a religion. But I like those thoughts.

hi chrisy
not sure of your age but i will say that no matter waht your age is you have your head screwed on straight ...keep it tht way...you have a great sense of waht a relatioship is and when you are ready(if not already invloved) look for someone on the same page as you...
good to see there are others who think the same way...
naturegoddess

i totally agree with u girl!!!!if a man loves u he should be willing to wait and makelove to u till youre married or ready enough to take on the respondsibilities...but u knw wat once u married u have all the freedom in the world to decide whether to make love or have sex...

rough sex is sex with the person u love
passionate sex is makin love
they alwayz can go hand in hand

great! More personal opinions from the 'experts'! Just what we need!

oooh fun subject

i guess it depends on your definition of love. If you could imagine a scale with ratings on it of how much i like ppl for a second. Somewhere up there is 'love'. To me love is a certain standard in familiarity, understanding, communication, sharing and also sacrifice.

back to sex, i don't have to love someone to have sex with them. if on my 'how much i like you' scale, love is a 9, then i might only have to like you at a 5 or 6. I have abslutely no problems with casual sex as long as all parties involved are aware of how things stand. Sex just feels so damn good (like chocolate). If 2 people feel strongly for each other (not necessarily love) and they like sex, why shouldn't they?

I've seen some people mention that when it comes to sex, the only important aspect is climax. I'd have to disagree. Climax is definately important, but it's not the only factor. Like shawn said, it's the journey that makes the destination even more rewarding.

I'll give you an analogy, if the destination is the only thing worth achieving then you might as well get your life over with. That's undeniably your life's destination (if the Epic of Gilgamesh has taught us anything), so if the journey is worthless then why not just rush to the climax and end it? The same principle can be applied to anything as well. Working hard at something and achieving your goal makes you appreciate it and enjoy the rewards alot more then if it was just handed to you on a silver platter with little to no effort expended. That's not to say that you can't enjoy rushing to a climax, but the internal reward (happiness) is less.

Personally, I feel that sex and love have a lot less to do with each other than most think. I have a lot of love for a lot of people, but that doesn't mean I sleep around. Hey, I love you, Ryo, but I certainly have no immediate intentions of jumping your bones.

However, that might just mean that there are more than one forms of love. And that's probably a different thread altogether.

At any rate, I've never found that love was a requirement for great sex. I'm not knocking it - right now I'm in a relationship that has both. And I'm quite happy with that. But I've had lovely purely physical relationships as well, and both have something to recommend them.

Anyway. Trying to draw a line between phrases like "F**KING", "having sex", and "making love" is futile. Coitus is coitus, and there's no dancing around the subject.

"Women need love compassion and tenderness not just a workout!!!! Hahaha!"
Well, I dunno about the rest of you, but I have personally quite enjoyed *just a workout*. If some of the women on this board cannot enjoy sex without a strong romantic attachment, I feel very sorry for you. Y'all are missing out on an entertaining facet of your sexuality.

who said you have to draw well-defined lines between such phrases? They're "fuzzy" concepts which means that they have boundaries that are fuzzy. THe point being that distinctions between such phrases are informative and useful.

Can anyone draw a real, viable distinction between those phrases then? I'd be interested to hear them. I don't feel that you can change the word for an ACT depending on the EMOTION involved. Whether I enjoy going to my pathophysiology lecture on monday mornings or not, it's still just a pathophysiology lecture.

it seems reasonable to say that sex=coitus, whereas romantically-based love={something more complicated, involving emotions, sex, committment, and usually a lot of baggage}

there are different degrees of love, and if someone says they "love" without sex then chances are that they aren't involved in a very deep love.

and of course, you can have sex without any love, since sex is, at bare minimum, a physical act.

Well i dunno. As a linguistic tool you can infer alot from how other people use the term. If you talk to a girl who says "we made love all the time" and then her boyfriend in private who says "we f'd alot". That speaks volumes as to how that person views the sex, or at least how they want other people to think they view it.

At the same time, i wouldn't put my own 'spin' on it by changing what it's called. If i have sex with someone i love, i still call it sex. Same as if i have sex with someone i don't love. I see it the same way you do Exodusnights, but as a descriptive device it makes sense.

You could 'drag yourself to your patho lecture', or 'dance your way to your patho lecture' depending on the image/emotion you want to convey for the act of going to your patho lecture.

it's harder with only text but it's possible. Body-language (including tone of voice) gives the whole story.

I agree with Ryokirah...... sex is sex no matter which way you have it. Whether you are in love, in lust or just in simple like. Just because you change the word the act is still the same.
Personally sex to me is better when you are in love because there is more emotion there... there is love. But what is wrong with being in lust even for the moment.... as long as your both agreeing to the situation.
Sex is a physical enjoyment... or so it should be.

Be happy.... have sex and enjoy it!