Quote:
My entire argument is that people should marry people that they are sexually compatible with--asexual people, low libido people, high libido people, monogamous people, polyamorous people, people with specific needs and desires, etc. And the obligation lies in fulfilling those needs, once you get into that relationship. People with normal libidos who find themselves in a sexless marriage probably have other problems. Sexual intimacy can and does save marriages. It. Is. Important...for most people.
Originally posted by
Xarien
The entire pretense for this argument is that you absolutely HAVE to have sex in order to be happy. While I agree that this undoubtedly hold true for the vast majority of people, I legitimately think that it's impossible to hold that logic for
...
more
The entire pretense for this argument is that you absolutely HAVE to have sex in order to be happy. While I agree that this undoubtedly hold true for the vast majority of people, I legitimately think that it's impossible to hold that logic for every person in the world that is or intends on marrying. There is no set of rules that applies to everyone in every marriage for every scenario.
"Sex is an obligation in a contract like marriage where you sign up for monogamy, not celibacy."
This comment is again dependent on the individual and what is understood before going into that contract. Because again, there isn't one definitive contract out there that we can all look up beforehand to understand what we're getting ourselves into. It's a case by case thing. I equate it to a polygamous marriage or one that simply has an open relationship. While I personally enjoy the feeling that comes with a monogamous relationship, I KNOW that polygamous relationships work and work well for some people. Nowhere on a marriage license does it say one has to have one sexual partner to have a happy marriage nor does it say how much sex a person must be willing to have with their partner to remain happy.
For some people sex is absolutely obligatory. They want and expect sex from their partner. I simply don't believe that it's an obligatory thing for ALL marriages. less
"Sex is an obligation in a contract like marriage where you sign up for monogamy, not celibacy."
This comment is again dependent on the individual and what is understood before going into that contract. Because again, there isn't one definitive contract out there that we can all look up beforehand to understand what we're getting ourselves into. It's a case by case thing. I equate it to a polygamous marriage or one that simply has an open relationship. While I personally enjoy the feeling that comes with a monogamous relationship, I KNOW that polygamous relationships work and work well for some people. Nowhere on a marriage license does it say one has to have one sexual partner to have a happy marriage nor does it say how much sex a person must be willing to have with their partner to remain happy.
For some people sex is absolutely obligatory. They want and expect sex from their partner. I simply don't believe that it's an obligatory thing for ALL marriages. less
On that same note, I wouldn't be happy in a relationship with someone who had a very specific kink, let's say, that I have no interest in or am totally turned off by. In that case, that kind of thing needs to be disclosed before marriage vows are said. If someone is into, I don't know, blood play, and I'm not having it at all, and he's my husband, and he's profoundly unhappy with those sexual needs not being met, if he told me about it beforehand, expressed how important it is to him, and I married him anyway, then I'm an idiot when it becomes a source of discontent. If I'm okay with an open marriage, maybe I'll say, "okay honey, you get your blood play kicks elsewhere, and we'll be fine," then perhaps we really will be fine and function just fine that way. If I marry an asexual person and we decide to have an open marriage so I can actually get laid, maybe we'll live happily ever after. If my asexual spouse won't hear of it, then there's a problem, isn't there? If my spouse suddenly becomes sexually distant an uninterested in me, then there's also clearly a problem. We need to find the root of it and work it out, because I'm not going to suffer a sexless marriage. You follow?
And yes--you do have a duty to fix sexual problems in a marriage if you want your marriage to survive. That's the obligation part. In traditional marriage vows, "to have and to hold," doesn't just mean to give a hug when the other one is down. It means to want each other, to desire each other, and please and satisfy each other. At its most basic, traditional root, marriage is that kind of specific bond.
That's why people with similar sexual interests and libidos should be together. That's what I'm saying. I don't know how to make myself any clearer.
