RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction

RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Greta75 -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 6:59:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 I didn't say it wasn't important, just that it isn't the star at the top of tree. So you would marry a woman who will never ever have sex with you after marriage ever for the rest of her life? Be honest. Don't bullshit. quote: Yes. And it's NOT centred around sex. There's a whole shedload of things that are just as important as sex. Again, you are saying you would marry a woman who have all the other important purposes personally to you, but you are willing to give up sex forever to be with her? And marry her knowing that you can NEVER have sex with her for the rest of your life? Would you? Don't bullshit me! There are genuine cases like this, where women have vaginitis, and men have married her agreeing to never fuck her, because he loves her for other things, but I highly doubt you are one of them. quote: She brightens my day just by being there. There is your purpose. But I doubt you would have married her if she told you, no sex for the rest of your life. I am simply saying that I refuse to be with a man who refuses to give me sex. Because it's too easy to find men with all the other qualities, that involves no sex. It's harder to find a man that can give me sex at the frequency I want. And I want that holy grail. I also want to say about your bullshit ad homineming my singlehood. It is by choice. If I wanted to be married so bad, I should have said yes to my two other marriage proposals after my divorce. Because marriages does not equal happiness. I've seen more unhappy marriages than happy marriages. In many ways, I am grateful to have none of their problems. Being married doesn't put you on a higher pedestal like you want to put yourself on. If your self-esteem of being a "great" person is coming from the angle of being a married man. quote: Tit-for-tat. Cold and calculating. You sound like one of those people that give presents with the expectation of getting one back. Well your perception of me is completely wrong. My beliefs are, when I give, I give unconditionally, and I choose who I wanna give it to. The fact that I rescue cats who are traumatised by abuse and cannot respond lovingly towards me as a result, but I simply kept them because their character, nobody will adopt them, to me, is as simple as that. The cat gives me nothing. No affection, no love. But I CHOSE to rescue that cat. I expect nothing in return. I have the same attitude towards people. I choose to do alot of things when I am in the mood of doing at wimp for people. Because when I do it, I do it completely unconditionally expecting nothing in return. The problem with doing things unconditionally is, people naturally do things for you in return and remember. It's just the way things work. Because I am a completely black and white person. IF I want to be selfish about it, I am completely selfish unreservingly. Those are selfish choices I choose to be selfish about. But when I choose to give, it is my own personal code that I only give when I feel happy giving for the sake of giving. If I don't feel happy giving, I don't give. When you feel happy giving for the sake of giving, the happiness of feeling happy about giving is the reward. Not what that person does in return for you. Like my cat, I feel happy I save a cat from abuse and able to provide her a home, food and shelter, it cost me nothing. She minds her own business. I mind my own business. I am getting absolutely nothing out of it. Of course I have many rescued cats with and different cat behaves differently some do respond with so much affection in return. But my policy is, I keep the cats that nobody wants when I try to get it adopted out. As simple as that. Whatever their characters are. I have chosen to give unconditionally to cats as my charity, because, I admire their integrity as an animal, compared to dogs.

jlf1961 -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 7:16:20 AM)
a couple of points: First, considering the stories of men with "sex addiction" that have hit the news, has anyone but me noticed that the women all seem to be on the high end of the "drop dead gorgeous, instant erection scale?" Not to mention that many of the women Tiger (as well as Charlie Sheen and a couple of others) all had one very specific thing in common? For the most part, these women were well known porn actresses (some known for specific talents/skills.) So, if it is an addiction problem, I think they were addicted to porn actresses and or specific acts which these ladies were known for. Second: Many of the so called sex addicts that have hit the news in recent years also had some sort of substance addiction problem as well, either active or in their past. In the case of Ozzy, the man has done so many drugs over his entire music career that he has reached the point where he has enough stored in his system, he is continually wasted without adding anything new (just watch his latest show on History Channel, I have heard people stoned on pot make better sentences.) Third: The <insert whatever> addict has become a cop out excuse for so many things that it is laughable. Addiction is a serious problem, and while there is a genetic link to addict personality disorder, some of the crap people claim to be addicted is, for lack of a better term, bullshit. Addiction is being used as an excuse for any behavior when they get caught. Finally, the op has already exemplified an extremely shallow personality and as far as the "black or white" opinion, seems to either be extremely naive, or a complete lack of understanding of the human species. It is my personal belief that sex is not the central aspect of a caring relationship, and considering the multitude of self help sex guides, videos, etc, if something aint working, you can at least find a book that might explain how to fix it. IF, for whatever reason, the couple are not sexually compatible, then they need to find a way to fix it or go their separate ways, there is no excuse for infidelity (okay so I agree that the adultery grounds for divorce should be reinstated.) Loyalty and fidelity are the most basic grounds for trust in a relationship, and if that is not there, then it is meaningless. While I do not think we should return to the days of stoning an adulterer, I do feel there should be some legal/civil ramifications to the act. Having had the opportunity to actually meet Sharon Osborne and speak with her, while I believe that living with her 24/7 might be a challenge for most men (she seems to have a zero tolerance level for stupidity) she is also a committed and caring person (look how long she stayed with Ozzy when he seemed to be hell bent on self destruction.) She, like any person, did not deserve to be cheated on. By the same token, any person, who knowingly becomes involved in a sexual relationship with someone in a committed relationship is equally to blame and should be dealt with (being painted international safety orange with non toxic paint and placed nude in a set of stocks in the court house square would be a start) in a manner that exemplifies their lack of morals and ethics.

Greta75 -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 7:19:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Finally, the op has already exemplified an extremely shallow personality and as far as the "black or white" opinion, seems to either be extremely naive, or a complete lack of understanding of the human species. It is my personal belief that sex is not the central aspect of a caring relationship, and considering the multitude of self help sex guides, videos, etc, if something aint working, you can at least find a book that might explain how to fix it. Sex problems cannot be fixed. The solution of that is usually divorce. 85% of marriages ended because of sex incompatibility issue. I think the fact that it's the number one destroyer of marriages, tells me that you guys are getting it wrong by calling it shallow. IF sex wasn't the most important factor in marriages, THEN why are such high incidences of marriages destroyed by the sex problems part not working out? The problem is, being honest. Like brutally honest with yourself. Will you marry someone if you knew you had to live without sex with her for the rest of your life? IF the answer is no. Then sex is your top priority. My answer is no. I will not marry a man who refuse to have sex with me for the rest of my life after I marry him. And I know most of you will not marry a spouse who has told you upfront they refuse to give you sex for the rest of your life too. So don't tell me sex is not important and on the top of the tree. It would be the dealbreaker. I am just being practical. I want to find a life partner base on rational evaluation. Not emotional evaluation. I prefer to find someone who fits me practically, and then choose to love that person. I feel like all of you guys proclaiming sex is not the top priority is just like lying. Ya know, just trying to say things in a PR way. Especially males. I know plenty of females who will be more than happy to be with a man who is happy to never have sex with her after marriage. And if they want a child, artificial insemination. Because they just don't like sex and don't want it.

jlf1961 -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 8:35:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Finally, the op has already exemplified an extremely shallow personality and as far as the "black or white" opinion, seems to either be extremely naive, or a complete lack of understanding of the human species. It is my personal belief that sex is not the central aspect of a caring relationship, and considering the multitude of self help sex guides, videos, etc, if something aint working, you can at least find a book that might explain how to fix it. Sex problems cannot be fixed. The solution of that is usually divorce. 85% of marriages ended because of sex incompatibility issue. I think the fact that it's the number one destroyer of marriages, tells me that you guys are getting it wrong by calling it shallow. IF sex wasn't the most important factor in marriages, THEN why are such high incidences of marriages destroyed by the sex problems part not working out? The problem is, being honest. Like brutally honest with yourself. Will you marry someone if you knew you had to live without sex with her for the rest of your life? IF the answer is no. Then sex is your top priority. My answer is no. I will not marry a man who refuse to have sex with me for the rest of my life after I marry him. And I know most of you will not marry a spouse who has told you upfront they refuse to give you sex for the rest of your life too. So don't tell me sex is not important and on the top of the tree. It would be the dealbreaker. I am just being practical. I want to find a life partner base on rational evaluation. Not emotional evaluation. I prefer to find someone who fits me practically, and then choose to love that person. I feel like all of you guys proclaiming sex is not the top priority is just like lying. Ya know, just trying to say things in a PR way. Especially males. I know plenty of females who will be more than happy to be with a man who is happy to never have sex with her after marriage. And if they want a child, artificial insemination. Because they just don't like sex and don't want it. Well, unless you have actually read the mind of ALL the guys who make this statement, this hardly qualifies as an intelligent statement, and considering you have no fucking clue what ALL guys think, actually makes you look, well, to be blunt, like a opinionated fool and supports my opinion of you. However, considering your statements on other topics, it is no surprise. But, so as to educate you, you are basing your statement on the men you have met in your life. Like the problems with surveys, you have clearly a limited experience due to your lack of a broad sampling group. The best example of this would be if an alien probe landed on the earth and took an immediate sample from one spot on the planet, say the sahara desert and then reported that the entire planet was a desert with little or no native species of any type. But you will probably fail to grasp the analogy as simple as it is to understand. To continue, and to clarify my statement, while I do enjoy sex, there are other aspects of a relationship that are more enjoyable for me. Intellectual conversation, companionship, etc. And while I get the companionship from my dogs, they do not have the ability to discuss a wide range of topics that I find interest in, nor are they really good at drinking coffee first thing in the morning. For one thing, the dogs do not seem to grasp that tongues do not go into coffee cups. Secondly, while I am a loner by nature, there are times when human contact is a good thing. Sitting on the back porch looking at the stars is a great activity, but try telling a dog about the beauty and majesty of the universe and getting some response other than a tail wag or the occasional bark. And even in the age of instant communication, discussing any topic over the phone, or on the internet lacks the subtle nuances of actual face to face communication. Finally, a hug or just having someone hold your hand is many times more gratifying than a quick fuck. I have a genius IQ, with the uncanny ability to process information and learn anything I want to learn. I have learned by experience that sex often leads to the break up of friendships and adds unnecessary complications to many endeavors that I may wish to accomplish. I am not alone in this opinion. Your statement further proves the observation by one poster that you are indeed a shallow person with no concept of higher motivations in interpersonal relationships beyond the physical, something that seems to be a driving force among a large majority of people today. By the way, it has been proven that seduction is far from just physical, it is intellectual, and sex with a woman that has a brain and comprehension of things beyond the orgasm leads to some very gratifying sex for both parties. Having the philosophy that sex is not the center or the main priority of a relationship does not mean there is no sex, it means that the sex is a hell of a lot more gratifying. It also means that sex is not the goal of a relationship, but a reward. If it ends in sex, great, but if it doesn't, you may find that you have made a long lasting friendship that has its own rewards and benefits. This is also the benefit of living a lifestyle that is above that of lower animals. I do think that life involves more than just eat, sleep, fuck repeat. Life is more than existing on basic instinct. Living means that you strive to learn, relish those relationships that bring pleasure beyond the physical. And considering your lack of the desire to actually research things you clearly have no concept or knowledge of, I can honestly say that you will have no comprehension on what I am trying to say, or the ability to actually try and figure it out.

Cinnamongirl67 -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 8:41:55 AM)
FR It's not just men, it can also be women were sex is at the top of the pyramid. It really can determine so many decisions, even when you are not aware of how much it does. I am an older woman who has went through menopause and that knocked sex off the tip of my pyramid. Now it's more just intermingled, and a lesser priority. I look back and think WOW ..... Women can think with their little brain too.[:D]

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 8:52:42 AM)
quote: Well, unless you have actually read the mind of ALL the guys who make this statement, this hardly qualifies as an intelligent statement, and considering you have no fucking clue what ALL guys think, actually makes you look, well, to be blunt, like a opinionated fool and supports my opinion of you. That doesn't follow. She specifically said that she feels that, feelings do not require facts or proof and thus her statement is perfectly intelligent and 100% valid. In fact, it is your statement that does not qualify as intelligent.

jlf1961 -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 9:48:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick quote: Well, unless you have actually read the mind of ALL the guys who make this statement, this hardly qualifies as an intelligent statement, and considering you have no fucking clue what ALL guys think, actually makes you look, well, to be blunt, like a opinionated fool and supports my opinion of you. That doesn't follow. She specifically said that she feels that, feelings do not require facts or proof and thus her statement is perfectly intelligent and 100% valid. In fact, it is your statement that does not qualify as intelligent. Actually, again, she is basing that on her experience, so even then her statement is flawed, and in turn invalid. A broad general statement of that nature is frowned on in debate, and continuing on the basis of her previous statements on other unrelated subjects even more serious in nature, is indicative of a person who, for whatever reason, has done little if anything to broaden her knowledge on any subject beyond that which is directly related to her in any way shape or form. One can 'feel' anything, however to make a judgement on an entire section of a species based on those feelings, is neither intelligent or even thought provoking. Thus she stated an opinion based on little more than limited experience, and placed the judgement on all males of the human species. It is equal to me saying that "I feel that coffee is important to human existence and necessary for every human to drink to function." That statement is neither truth for me, for in point of fact, at some level, despite personal feelings to the contrary, I know it to be untrue. An even better example would be "I feel that humans should not live in communities with a population greater than 5000 persons." While I may personally believe this, I know that it is not true (even if the rates of crime and interpersonal violence seems to support the claim.) One cannot make a valid argument based on feelings, and thus make an observation on half of humanity. I have noticed you have made similar statements, but adding the proviso that while it is your feeling, you admit that your knowledge may be limited. In other words, you do not base a complete observation of something on just your 'feelings' which indicates a willingness to accept information that may be contrary to what you have observed, either by personal endeavors to broaden your perspective or by listening to other points of view and combining that information with your own. A trait the op has never attempted in any discussion she has taken part in, in essence, demonstrating a marked lack of willingness to broaden her knowledge base. She routinely returns to flawed arguments even with presented with sources that would contradict her argument. Feelings are a poor basis for rational arguments or observations of a species. Feelings get in the way of truly observing the world around us, stunts us as a species intellectually, emotionally and socially. Feelings are the basis for cruelty, terror and 90% of the problems facing civilization today. People become terrorists feel oppressed and that makes them easily led by people promoting death and destruction on scales that boggle the mind in their cruelty and randomness. While it is our emotions (feelings) that places us higher than other species on this planet, it is our ability to see beyond personal feelings to learn and expand our knowledge that can lead us to achieve great things.

jlf1961 -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 10:28:58 AM)
Looking over the arguments on sex addiction in particular and addiction in general, the best argument is one made by Maslow. Maslow postulated that humans work on a hierarchy of needs, often illustrated as a pyramid, with physiological at the bottom and self-actualization at the top. Sex falls into the physiological need in the area of procreation, however, it is also a component of need for love and belonging which is at the third tier of the hierarchy. In the area of addiction, one or more of these needs outweigh others that, in a well adjusted individual, would not fall into the same priorities. The problem is instant gratification. In attempts to achieve goals that are at a higher tier of the hierarchy, there is a time element, and some do not wish to make that investment. The problem is that immediate gratification is rarely long lasting, nor fulfilling, thus an addict has to search for a better high, while at the same time, loses parts of his or herself and thus self esteem. I would compare it to a trophy hunter. The kill he/she makes is not for food, or physical needs, but for the gratification of the kill itself. It has been theorized that it may be the basis for some serial criminal motivations, thus the escalation of the intensity of the criminal act. While one female poster did reference menopause and thus a change in her personal motivations concerning sex, it is not always a biological change that is the determining motivation for a change in attitudes. When it comes to sex addiction, at least in the cases that have hit the media, many of these so called addicts have hit peaks in professional careers, or in the case of at least one, seems to be motivated by simple shock value. The problem is that these 'conquests' are rarely known for being aloof, Tiger Woods for example, had affairs with prominent porn actresses, all admitted to being promiscuous in nature, hardly a conquest if anyone would satisfy their desires, so Tiger went for quantity. Where as Charlie Sheen seemed motivated by the shock value of his latest escapade. Micheal Douglas, on the other hand, may have actually been addicted to the conquest. Many of the women he had affairs with were not known for sleeping around and known instead for being very selective. It would have taken more to get them into bed than just being flashy. Thus, and this is an opinion, it was not the act itself or the physical gratification of the act, but some other motivation or personal unfulfilled need that was gratified. Addiction seems to be the need to find a substitute for some unfulfilled part of a persons life, to fill a void. I have known recovering drug addicts who have jumped into exercise with the same 'gusto' as their using, without even considering the motivation. In each case, they admit to a part of their life that is unfulfilled, and while exercise does not meet that need, it provides a substitute. Yet they never seem to be willing to change their lives in any way that might aid them in finding fulfillment in the area they feel is lacking. Addiction is more than the physical dependency on a substance. I have also observed people who have become dependent on pain medication even after the cause of the pain has been eliminated. Mentally they know they no longer need the medication, but physiologically they cannot function without it. However, after the effort to eliminate the physiological need for the substance, they go on to lead balanced lives without excess in any aspect of how they live.

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 11:16:10 AM)
quote: Actually, again, she is basing that on her experience, so even then her statement is flawed, and in turn invalid. Wrong. Your argument is invalid.

WickedsDesire -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 11:19:52 AM)
Cheats are cheats creatures of utter wretch…not only am I cake addict (truly I will make my twin sister go to the bakers for me tomorrow). Have I ever cheated on someone since I was older than 20? Yes only one. I blame me for being with her… to be brief. Even I learn. So it is perfectly normal for me to spend months and years alone…cats and hot water bottle aside. I am also a sex addict or as I prefer to say I simply like good sex. And yet I have found that so rare so I must always compromise. Not use it as an excuse. I am okay with couples who allow it together for fun reasons – to medical reasons. There are no other excuses. And yet here are some facts 1. The site with the greatest percentage of cheats are singer sites 2. Then fetish sites 3. Then mainstream single sites

OsideGirl -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 11:50:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick quote: When it starts controlling your relationships, it's a problem. I disagree, I wouldn't put up with a sexless relationship. But, there's a difference between expecting sex to be a part of your relationship and what she's describing.

jlf1961 -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 11:54:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick quote: Actually, again, she is basing that on her experience, so even then her statement is flawed, and in turn invalid. Wrong. Your argument is invalid. My point would only be invalid if she had not given the option that my statement concerning my point of view was valid, she did not do so. She basically made a statement that indicated that, without knowing me, I was presenting a false fact, and continued that thought to include all men who similarly made the same type of statement. Basically, she was calling me a liar, and by extension all men making that same statement. The fact you fail to see that flaw, or perhaps are ignoring that, makes your observation meaningless. She even said as much. Now, since she does not know me other than these boards, and by extension, men all over the planet, I can only surmise that the class of males she deals with are driven by one motivation. The fact that she made that statement is indicative of a woman that seems to be satisfied in dealing with males who only have the goal of getting laid. Considering I have been married to two women who were unfaithful, would it be correct for me to make the statement that all women care about is getting in bed with any male that comes along regardless of vows to remain faithful to one man? While I may have felt that at the time of discovering their promiscuous nature, I would have to admit that feelings aside, the statement is neither the truth for the majority or accurate by any stretch of the imagination. I have also had relationships with women who were faithful and did not cheat. Thus the point is that she can only honestly say that about a minority of males, not all. I can actually state that I have met women who made the same statement, and eventually found that some, not all, were not telling the truth. Does that make all women who say they are not interested in sex as priority in a relationship liars? No, it does not. In fact, women have a habit of pointing out the flaws in a statement that generalizes an observation and applying that observation to all women. Why then is it wrong for a male of the human species to make the same basic argument about women, but in turn, it is a valid argument for women to make the same type statement concerning men? By the same logic, you have twice said my point was not valid, without pointing out how, or why it was invalid. Nor have you commented on other posters that have pointed out the shallow nature of her statements, thus, it would appear that you are targeting me personally, in your responses. I suggest you look at other posts in response to her statements and see that I am not the only one that has made statements that basically pointed out that she has failed to make a valid statement, and in essence actually, showed that the op is invalidating her argument concerning cheating and sex addiction.

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 12:53:42 PM)
Wrong gain, your point remains invalid.

Cinnamongirl67 -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 1:06:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick quote: Actually, again, she is basing that on her experience, so even then her statement is flawed, and in turn invalid. Wrong. Your argument is invalid. My point would only be invalid if she had not given the option that my statement concerning my point of view was valid, she did not do so. She basically made a statement that indicated that, without knowing me, I was presenting a false fact, and continued that thought to include all men who similarly made the same type of statement. Basically, she was calling me a liar, and by extension all men making that same statement. The fact you fail to see that flaw, or perhaps are ignoring that, makes your observation meaningless. She even said as much. Now, since she does not know me other than these boards, and by extension, men all over the planet, I can only surmise that the class of males she deals with are driven by one motivation. The fact that she made that statement is indicative of a woman that seems to be satisfied in dealing with males who only have the goal of getting laid. Considering I have been married to two women who were unfaithful, would it be correct for me to make the statement that all women care about is getting in bed with any male that comes along regardless of vows to remain faithful to one man? While I may have felt that at the time of discovering their promiscuous nature, I would have to admit that feelings aside, the statement is neither the truth for the majority or accurate by any stretch of the imagination. I have also had relationships with women who were faithful and did not cheat. Thus the point is that she can only honestly say that about a minority of males, not all. I can actually state that I have met women who made the same statement, and eventually found that some, not all, were not telling the truth. Does that make all women who say they are not interested in sex as priority in a relationship liars? No, it does not. In fact, women have a habit of pointing out the flaws in a statement that generalizes an observation and applying that observation to all women. Why then is it wrong for a male of the human species to make the same basic argument about women, but in turn, it is a valid argument for women to make the same type statement concerning men? By the same logic, you have twice said my point was not valid, without pointing out how, or why it was invalid. Nor have you commented on other posters that have pointed out the shallow nature of her statements, thus, it would appear that you are targeting me personally, in your responses. I suggest you look at other posts in response to her statements and see that I am not the only one that has made statements that basically pointed out that she has failed to make a valid statement, and in essence actually, showed that the op is invalidating her argument concerning cheating and sex addiction. Your brilliant and she is stupid. Case closed.

jlf1961 -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 2:52:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cinnamongirl67 Your brilliant and she is stupid. Case closed. I would not say I am brilliant, but experience has taught me as soon as you make a general statement over a large section of society, basing it only on "I feel" you can kiss your degree good bye. In point of fact, as soon as the words "I feel" comes out of your mouth in an oral presentation, you are on thin ice (the only exception I can think of is Philosophy.) Back to the topic: All too often 'sex addiction' has become the defense of some person, usually famous, to justify cheating. Seriously it sounds a hell of a lot better than saying "I was bored at home and decided to get some strange." Considering the probable long term effects on his brain from prolonged and excessive drug use, Ozzy could have easily said, "I actually thought she was my wife." And it be believable. Hell, on his reality series, he spent the large part of an episode looking for the dog he had on a leash, and at the time it was widely believed he had been clean for some time.

NookieNotes -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 5:29:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 I am friends with someone because that person makes me feel happy and makes me laugh. That is a specific purpose. Most people will befriend people who make them feel good about themselves. People are also willing to do things for me, because obviously, I have done things for them when they needed me. It's all reciprocal. Tit-for-tat. Cold and calculating. This is not cold and calculating. It's simply a different way of explaining what makes her tick. I get exactly what she is saying. Someone may want love as the most important thing in a marriage. If she does not, who are you to judge? Why would wanting sex in a particular format with someone she is compatible with be less valid than your reasons? quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 It is my personal belief that sex is not the central aspect of a caring relationship, and considering the multitude of self help sex guides, videos, etc, if something aint working, you can at least find a book that might explain how to fix it. This is simply not always true for a myriad of reasons. I have had many caring relationships. I have been married. I have had very long-term BFs. I have a Pet. And frankly, for me, sex is CRITICAL. Would I leave him because of a lack of sex? Very possibly, if it were not specifically a medically impossible thing. Because, to me, sex and affection go hand in hand. I show much of my love with touch, and REQUIRE desire from my partner. I need more than that, yes. Love, communication, friendship, etc. etc. However, I've had all that minus the sex, and I ended the relationship. Because I have no interest in marrying my best friend. I'm interested in marrying a lover. quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 I feel like all of you guys proclaiming sex is not the top priority is just like lying. Ya know, just trying to say things in a PR way. Now you are being just as rude as they are, calling them liars for their views of love and marriage. You can state your beliefs and stand up for yourself without suggesting they care "doing it wrong." quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I have a genius IQ, with the uncanny ability to process information and learn anything I want to learn. I have learned by experience that sex often leads to the break up of friendships and adds unnecessary complications to many endeavors that I may wish to accomplish. I am not alone in this opinion. That's not been my experience. So, you are being very clear. YOU prefer others things in a relationship. YOU have had complications due to sex. That does not make her experience wrong. You're a genius. Surely you know that one size does not fit all. quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 By the way, it has been proven that seduction is far from just physical, it is intellectual, and sex with a woman that has a brain and comprehension of things beyond the orgasm leads to some very gratifying sex for both parties. Having the philosophy that sex is not the center or the main priority of a relationship does not mean there is no sex, it means that the sex is a hell of a lot more gratifying. It also means that sex is not the goal of a relationship, but a reward. If it ends in sex, great, but if it doesn't, you may find that you have made a long lasting friendship that has its own rewards and benefits. Don't you even realize that she already said this? She has long lasting friendships that have their own rewards and benefits. Are you so blinded by your dislike for her saying that sex is her priority, that you don't even see that you are parroting her? quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Actually, again, she is basing that on her experience, so even then her statement is flawed, and in turn invalid. Oh! The irony! (Bold mine.) quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I have a genius IQ, with the uncanny ability to process information and learn anything I want to learn. I have learned by experience that sex often leads to the break up of friendships and adds unnecessary complications to many endeavors that I may wish to accomplish. I am not alone in this opinion. What you are doing with your words is to deny HER choice of reality in favor of your own, because you think she has a shallow personality, through what? Interactions on a discussion forum? Bah. It seems to me that a smart man would know better than to trust casual online interaction with someone as a way to diagnose anything. quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Basically, she was calling me a liar, and by extension all men making that same statement. But SHE did it first! You are a genius. Why are you taking your cues from someone you treat like an idiot? quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Now, since she does not know me other than these boards Oh geez. Again, the irony. You just ooze it, don't you? quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I suggest you look at other posts in response to her statements and see that I am not the only one Logic is not dictated by the number of people who agree to or do something. If that were the case, spending money playing lottery would be more "right" than buying books, seeing theater movies and playing video games combined. Think for yourself, and don't use others' opinions, even when they agree with your assumptions, as a crutch. You may find that they were wrong, too. You can contest her OP theory without making her life choices an issue.

jlf1961 -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 5:53:58 PM)
NookieNotes, have you actually read some of the arguments she has put forth on the variety of subjects she has posted on? Even when given links that would greatly help her understanding of a subject, she refuses to even acknowledge she even needs to understand what the hell she is talking about. As far as my response to her position, let me ask you, have you ever taken an oral for an advanced degree? Once the words "I feel" are used to preface a broad subject such as she made, you can kiss that degree good bye, unless you can prove your point with a lot of evidence to back your point. At no point did I say that seeking the physical gratification is wrong, I did state that when there is more than just the physical, it has been proven the sex act to be much more intense. Her statement is the equivalent of any detrimental statement about all women drivers, blonde women, etc. Had she done even a half assed google search, she would have found more than enough evidence, documented in detail about men who believe just that, sex is not the central part of a relationship. Using Maslow and and even Masters and Johnson's research, there is overwhelming proof that relationships based purely on the physical are, in the end unsatisfying. I also did not say that I abstain from sex, or would not enjoy it if it happened, I simply stated that is not the goal for any of my friendships with women. What you may see as irony, I see as my attempt to explain the fallacy of her argument. The observation is invalid when applied to all men. As for leaving someone when the sex ends, I had the experience of loving a woman who suffered a stroke at an early age. Before the stroke, our sex life was great, after it, it all but ended. I did not leave her because of no sex, I left when I was offered a high paying job with benefits that would have allowed her to get much better medical care than what was provided on medicare and medicaid. When I accepted the job, she opted to stay in the same small town with her grandmother who, for reasons known only to her, fought every effort to get the medical treatments her grand daughter needed. I was not going to stay in two horse town working two full time jobs and watch a woman I cared deeply about die in a very slow way. And since she could not be considered mentally incompetent, I had two choices, and I made the one that would allow me to live without the heartache her family was causing. And considering the op has made the statement that "there is more than enough money spent on cancer research" when my nephew is going through chemo again to stop the advance of leukemia, there is no way in hell that I am going to let her slide on bullshit statements. I asked her if she would like to travel to my nephew's home town and tell him and his mother that enough money is spent on cancer research. Hell I will take out the loan to fly her round trip from Singapore, just so I can see her do it, and get the holy shit slapped out of her from a mother who has been told her only child will probably not live to see his tenth birthday.

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 5:57:15 PM)
quote: I would not say I am brilliant That's good. quote: but experience has taught me as soon as you make a general statement over a large section of society, basing it only on "I feel" you can kiss your degree good bye. Well duh, as soon as you say "I feel" it has entered into the realm of pure emotional opinion which removes all necessity for proof or logic, it is a statement of a feeling, not a fact. So as I said.... Your point is invalid. You are so full of your own over inflated opinion of your genius and your hatred of Greta that you are posting total logical bullshit just to cut at her.

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 5:58:28 PM)
quote: have you actually read some of the arguments she has put forth on the variety of subjects she has posted on? And exactly what relevance are those other discussions to this one?

longwayhome -> RE: Cheating and Sex Addiction (8/6/2016 6:17:34 PM)
In response to the OP, I think that "sex addiction" is often used as an excuse for cheating in the form of "I'm not a dog, I'm a sex addict". I do however think that someone has a problem if they obsessively make everything explicitly about sex or if their sexual behaviour interferes with their ability to function, e.g. hold down a job or look after themselves or their loved ones. A lot of the rest of it is about how you regard sex, love and fidelity. And how judgemental you are about those things. There is nothing wrong with wanting to have multiple partners and lots of sex all the time. It is only a problem where it is dishonest, to be more specific where you have promised sexual monogamy to someone and then proceeded to abuse the trust you have with that person. We all have different contracts with our fellow human beings, some of them sexual, some of them non-sexual, some of them sexually exclusive, some not. If we are explicit about that it isn't cold or calculating. It's just honest. In a romantic partnership, I want to have a close sexual bond because that is a big part of how I express my love. It's not the only way to express love and there have been times in my life when I have had less sex as a result of illness and/or stress on the part of either party. That has never ended a relationship for me but if I thought that sexual expression wouldn't any longer be part of a relationship (except for a very good reason) that would end it. There's a big difference between "don't care enough to shag you", "can't be arsed" and not being particularly sexual while you struggle with major life events. Bad things do happen to people and I would never abandon on someone in their hour of need just because I couldn't scratch the itch. Conversely when other aspects of the relationship go wrong, and the care or respect evaporates, the sex tends to die pretty quickly for me. Wanting sex and going out and getting it is not addiction, neither is having very specific needs and being honest about them. The other person has free will and the right to consent or not to the contract you are offering. My concern about the sex addition stuff is that I suspect either something else is going on in terms of someone's mental health, or it is just an excuse for failing in a monogamous relationship contract, especially if you are male, rich and in the public eye. Greta seems pretty explicit about what she wants and needs both sexually and in non sexual relationships. It may not fit with what some other people want or need, or be particularly "traditional", but it is honest. Enjoying sexual satisfaction and the release of orgasm is not addiction.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625