Love or sex?
 

My older sister is constantly compaining about her boyfriend of 5 years... him hanging with his friends, his movie choices, other stupid, pointless complaints. I've found myself getting pissy at her, because here she is, with a guy who loves her, a guy who supports her, who has done everything except propose (though we all know it will happen), and she complains about such trivial things.

Then there are the points when she complains about his abilities in bed, and I get really mad. I know that the physical side of a relationship can be an important part, yet, as someone who has never heard the words 'I love you' from any of her boyfriend's lips, I find myself thinking that I would rather have someone who loved me than someone who was great at sex.

Its hard to think about, as love and sex usually come hand in hand, but which would you choose? Someone who loved you unconditionally, but wasn't good in bed, or someone who was great at sex, but never really felt anything for you? Which would you choose... Love or Sex?

(I'm sure this topic could get to the point where it would be moved to the sewers, but lets keep it clean. :p)

Ugh, the idea of being with someone for the rest of your life, and they're horrible in bed? Christ, why not just have a very close friend? I vote neither. If we're talking forever, there's no middle ground. It's both or neither.

For the long term, I'd say someone who loved me. Sex is important, but as the years go by the lust part can fade, and you need to have something other than sex in common to keep things going. That's not to say I would be okay with an outright bad sex life, but if both people make the effort you should be able to get things at least to the point of being satisfactory.

On the other hand, I can see having someone you have great sex with, but no strong emotional bond, as a relief. Long term relationships are hard, and I see nothing wrong with finding someone you have a good time with for the short term.

At this stage in life? Sex, sex, sex. I'm 22; I want to fuck. This love stuff can wait. I don't think the power of bedroom antics can be ignored in any healthy relationship - we're all wired to get off, and if you can't get off with the person you're with, you're that much closer to looking elsewhere. Biology wins this one.

Love and sex are more or less equal. A good relationship needs to have both in it. One is (hopefully) the outcome of the other. However, this shouldn't dismiss either end of either spectrum (love and its short relationships and abuses, sex and its kinky shit and group activites) because thats what makes life interesting and thats how we learn and grow.

Exactly. As LeHah said, both are needed. If you're the nicest person in the world but horrible in bed, you're a friend. If you're annoying but great in bed you're a fuckbuddy. You need to have some of both to be a true romantic relationship.

Well, wait a second. I think you can have a romantic relationship without sex - obviously, since I've been in relationships that were good and fun before I got ass from a girl. However, I don't think it would last long in most cases because people are sexual by default. Obviously there are exceptions and obviously people who are "romantic at heart" put feelings before eating a bitch out - but the question is can it last?

I say no.

I completely agree with everyone who said there has to be both, but I guess for me it really depends heavily on how long I intend for the relationship to last. If it's someone I plan to grow old with, I'd have to say that love is more important, without a doubt. However, at this stage in my life I can imagine being in the kind of relationship with someone where we didn't completely and unconditionally love each other, as long as the sex was great. I cannot envision being in a relationship with someone I really loved but was not having amazing sex with.

Ask me again when I'm 60 and I'll almost certainly give a different answer.

I dunno, but her boyfriend must be a complete retard. I would kick her in her face, repeatedly. Fucking bitch.

I mean, what the fuck, does she have a boyfriend just for the sake to receive premium intercourse or what

I sure do feel like the odd man out in this thread. I've got to say that I can easily imagine being in a relationship with someone where the sex wasn't great. Honestly I'm not even sure what it means to be good in bed anyway. I've never really understood the concept.

I've also got to ask... when people talk about sex, are they talking about just the "main event" or are they taking the whole sexual package? Especially if we're talking about someone who isn't good at the "main course" but whose other "side dishes" are just fine, that would be great as far as I'm concerned.

I don't find sex particularly important. I like it just fine, but it's not the most important thing in my relationships. In fact, I'd probably be the one who got dumped over something like this. I just don't have the sexual appetite that most people would look for in a partner. I'm in a relationship right now. Since it hasn't been all that long, I can't tell you whether it will last. What I can tell you is that my girlfriend has a similar view, and so we seem like we'd be compatible.

The way I thought of it was that the person you're in a relationship with wasnt incapable of sex... its not like there wouldnt be any sex or messing around or anything. It just... wouldnt be 'OMG THAT WAS AMAZING' kind of sex. Like the guy didnt last long, or the girl wasnt enthusiastic, or something similar.

I mean, I could just be a die-hard romantic at heart. If I love the guy, and he loved me, I think I'd be extremely happy, regardless of his abilities in bed.

Of course, like I said, this is just my thinking now. It's hard to describe without sounding pathetic, but I was so sure that my last boyfriend loved me, and when he broke up with me (telling me that he never really loved me, he always loved his high school girlfriend), I found my mind bargaining with itself, saying that I'd give up all the good sex we had if he had only loved me the way I loved him, because he was THAT amazing of a guy ('was' being the keyword here). So when my sister complained about her boyfriend's abilities in bed, of course I'd get bitchy, because she's so ungrateful for what she has.

Thus, this topic. I wanted to see what other people thought, or if they've had similar thoughts.

As sexist as it sounds, this is a very "female" way of thinking. Men on the other hand, are usually driven "sexually". (Which is very strange, considering men are generally "logical thinkers" while women are generally "emotional thinkers".)

I agree with you, but also wonder why men, when they seem to be so preoccupied with sex, become such lazy bastards about sex when they've been in a long term relationship. I don't mean 2 or 3 years. I mean like 10.

This phenomenon is part of why I wouldn't expect life-long earth shattering sex. It may be that way for a while, but I have yet to hear of a relationship where it stayed like that for the long haul.

Because once the tunnel's finished, walking up and down it for years and years isn't particularly exciting.

People evolve physically, mentally and so does the couple and the relationship as a result. Sex just evolves along with all the rest. I think a truly fusional couple just gotta let nature do, on that aspect of things.

Plus I think "failure to get it up" (common for many men) might play in to that equation, Midna =(

I usually hear men griping about sex (ie: never given the chance) as opposed to women.

tiki hit it on the head WAY better than I could've.

In an animalistic sense, men need to "change it up", even move on to other women because they're biologically trained to impregnate as many women as possible. (Women, on the other hand, have the urge to pop out babies, though I don't think they have a particular urge to be gangfucked repeatedly.)

Because most women make a face when you go to stick it in their ass.

I call bullshit on this but then again... We're not married.

If you're really in love, the sex should come naturally, since love requires that both of you communicate well and often. You can't very well complain about your partner's performance in bed if you've never bothered to give them directions. If you whine to someone other than your partner about sex, your brain is clearly malfunctioning. If you find yourself on the receiving end of such a lament, quickly suggest that the party in question immediately STFU and tell someone who gives a damn or, perhaps, even the person they're, y'know, having sex with? It's not that big a request, really.

I think there's equal potential for the proverbial fire to get hotter or colder as time goes on, depending on the choices both parties make and the expectations they have for the future. If the sex gets dull and you think that's just part of the natural progression, you'll be far less likely to surprise your partner with a Kama Sutra or a fancy new swing or some sexy li'l silk thang. You'll probably just whine about it to your friends, family, and co-workers.

ALL fires require constant fuel.

I think that if you continue to deepen the communication and strengthen the trust in a relationship, the sex will get progressively more fresh and inventive. That's why ten out of ten times I'd pick love over good sex.

I'd go with love. Not for any of these in-depth reasons above, I'm just not fussed about sex a lot of the time. I guess it's just the way I was programmed or something.

I'll quote this because it is super-ultra true. I've been in relationships where the sex was terrible, and it's impossible to make that work. I won't say that other people might find it okay to be like that but to me, no sex is better than bad sex, and having bad sex with one person for the rest of my life sounds like a fucking nightmare (EDIT: no pun intended). Like Chris Rock says, life is long if you make the wrong decisions.

So yeah, both or neither. I'll never settle for "halfway there" when it comes to a relationship.

Oh also, like "Back Alley Ally" and some others say, complaining to someone else about bad sex is Goddamn retarded. Given that the sex is bad, communication is the only hope you have of ever working things out. Don't bother other people with your or your boyfriend's erectile dysfunction problems. I know from experience it's not just girls that do this. (Also, a lot of girls who complain about bad sex don't seem to realize that the problem may be them.)

^

I've had both (love with bad sex and great sex without love), and if we're talking a lifelong commitment, it needs to be both. No question. Either one without the other isn't satisfying for more than a short period of time.

People who say they can live without good sex from a partner they intend to stay with, exclusively, for the rest of their lives, either have a medical problem--like a hormone deficiency--or they've never actually had good sex. They don't know what they're missing, so it's easy to settle.

In your sister's case, though, I would guess that she needs to break up with him. She hardly sounds happy. And saying "he loves her! that should be enough for her!" is more than a little naive on your part.

I'm trying to contain my shock.

And I'm saying right now, the people who say good sex just happens in a good relationship need to watch less Dawson's Creek and have a grown up relationship or two before voicing their opinions. It just happens. What a fucking joke.