In thinking having more than 5 sexual partners doesn't make you a raging whore bag?

[fifithefoof]

Following on from the last thread .....

Actually I am the one in our relationship who displays love in physical intimacy, DH is more than happy to display it in other ways and have less sex, I want more sex otherwise I can start to feel unloved.

So this ‘men wouldn’t stay’ nonsense is stereotypical and not across the board.

Actually some men display love and affection in other ways too.

And Jacques your ability never to be hurt by anyone is admirable, if decidedly uncommon.

There are LOTS of relationships where physical intimacy isn't a part of it actually. For lots of reasons.

Precious abuse, disability being two.

You have a very blinkered view of the world Lorna.

I'd like to say I hope it never bites you on the ass but you're actually being so rude despite people patiently taking the time to try to explain, it wouldn't be true.

Fifi, to bring this back to the start, the point I'm making is that being physically intimate with someone is objectively an expression of something that people would want someone they are in love with to only express towards them. That is normal. All the tension and emotions these conversations bring up is because intimate acts are objectively meaningful otherwise no one would care about them. Claiming that the act itself is both meaningless and it doesn't matter if you do it with hundreds of people.while at the same time saying it is so meaning full life long relationships are built around the exclusivity of it is at best illogical, surely you can understand that ?

But I also only want to live with my husband

And I want him to only want to live with me

Doesn’t mean I wouldn’t live with someone else if the situation was different though

Same with making dinner
Having breakfast
Going on a spa break

All the tension and emotions these conversations bring up is because intimate acts are objectively meaningful otherwise no one would care about them

Cracking apology for being rude

Claiming that the act itself is both meaningless and it doesn't matter if you do it with hundreds of people.while at the same time saying it is so meaning full life long relationships are built around the exclusivity of it is at best illogical, surely you can understand that

And that’s the difference between us. My relationships aren’t built about sex - they’re so much more than the act of intercourse.

Going on a spa break

There’s always someone who goes too far

My marriage isn't built around sex.

Jacques

Lorna, I know this is probably going to surprise you. But the sex with my husband wasn’t that great to start with. He took a good while to get into it the poor bugger.

It’s amazing now but a lot of them need training. Lots of it.

Jacques so you wouldn't have minded.your husband shagging around. That is unusual.

If your husband made dinner for someone else, it wouldn't cause the sort of heartache that you can read about everyday. This is just getting silly. Loving Relationships are almost always (Jacques being the exception) built around sexual monogamy..because sex is not meaningless. No other act in a marriage is given such prominence,.at least at the start. It has an objective meaning to it which is why you would not accept your partner passing of an indescretion as meaningless.

My marriage isn't built around sex.

Unless you would tolerate your husband having sex with other women, newsflash. It is.

Lorna you’re not listening to people!!!!

My husband making and having dinner with someone else would be far more an issue than him going to a nightclub, getting high and spending the night with someone.

Honestly it would.

Even his male friend ? How strange..if he had sex with his male friend on the other hand....

Jacques so you wouldn't have minded.your husband shagging around. That is unusual

So unusual. But not wrong. Doesn't work for everyone right?

to bring this back to the start, the point I'm making is that being physically intimate with someone is objectively an expression of something that people would want someone they are in love with to only express towards them.

Change the word objectively to subjectively and then you will be correct lornar.

You haven't answered my question, so I'll ask it again: Will you dump the next man you are in love with if he isn't as good at sex as your cheating Ex lornar?

What has the sex of his friends got to do with it?!

If he chose to make and have dinner alone with a friend in an intimate fashion (that’s what we are talking about) it would be deeply weird!!!

Having sexual intercourse IS undeniably intimate! How bonkers to deny that!

I’m glad I don’t dump men who aren’t as good at sex as I want them to be. Sex is better when you learn each other.

I’m sorry you’ve not had the chance to experience that yet, Lorna

Passive aggressiveness is the last resort, hmm?

Agree that this “debate” is getting silly. Same old.

Wow it's like the twilight zone in here.
You can have sex and not be in a relationship.
You can have sex and be in a relationship. Most relationships come with commitment and monogamy, even if sex is not always on the table.

It's that simple.

What debate are you talking about Silent? I see no debate here, I see an unhappy single woman me-railing this thread to tell happy women in different relationships and none, that the way they view sex is wrong.

I was being ironic.

I use other fora if I want to get involved in proper debates.