The first couple of times I read this paragraph my brain insisted that the beautiful naked woman was in the woods, not giving you wood. It was a whole lot more confusing that way.
I know it’s not conscious. That’s not the point. But you are saying that you cannot be in a loving relationship with someone you aren’t physically, sexually attracted to. Right?
So you could have a sexless amorous relationship?
I don’t understand this conclusion. I have many close male friends who I love deeply, but I don’t have any particular interest in fucking them.
The amorous bit is the sex bit. You can have a deep friendship without sex.
But this means sex and love are the same thing, or at least mutually necessary. Is that what you’re saying?
Actually, there are a couple men who it seems I can’t speak to for less than an hour. I have fun when I’m with them, and, if I ever get the opportunity to meet them in person, I can see the conversation, the wit, and the fun going on until the wee small hours of the morning. I’m not going to have sex with either of them. One of them you already know – our own, esteemed Polycarp (which also may be why your screen’s looking a bit red – I think he’s blushing:o). He’s married, and out of respect for his marriage, even if he looked like Tom Cruise at his best, there’s no way I’d have sex with him. The other is the homosexual partner of one of my oldest friends. In addition to being, in effect, married, he’s also told me he’s not interested in women and I respect that.
Because of my personal sexual ethics, it’s not that simple. I have another male friend who has given me fantastic massages and who I have seen naked, in a hot tub as it happens. I’m attracted in him, and I have no doubt sex with him would be good to wonderful. He’s not married, or even in a relationship, but I’m still leaving sex with him to the realm of fantasy (Oh baby, oh baby, oh!!!;)) because I don’t love him, and I have no desire to marry him.
Does this make things clearer?
CJ
Priceguy, you seem to need to clear up your semantics before continuing this thread - I think you have different definitions for these words than the other contributors.
Which words? “Straight” and “gay” or “sex” and “love”? Please straighten me out.
I don’t know - I’ve never been in this situation, so I can’t say how I would react. I can say that I likely wouldn’t be attracted to the woman, even if she was (I’m not sure of my term here, so please forgive me if I err) a pre-surgical transsexual. As for a post-op transsexual, I don’t know how I’d feel about that, whether I’d be attracted to him or not.
As for your second example, to me, she is still a woman - and I remain unattracted to women. I can love a woman as a friend, and not desire that person as a lover.
Not really. I respect sexual ethics. I’m not one to sleep around myself. But if there is a special someone, I’m not going to care about the shape of that person’s genitals.
If I said that I’d never date a fat woman no matter how wonderful she was, you’d all call me a shallow asshole. But I can say I would never date a man no matter how wonderful he is, and that’s somehow OK. I just don’t get the difference.
Now I’m 
There are several things you seem to be asking here. One is about sexual proclivities - why don’t straight people fancy members of their own sex, and gay people fancy members of the opposite sex. My answer: we’re wired that way. Bisexual people can fancy both: lucky them, they’ve increased their dating pool.
The next is about the difference between love and lust:
I’m not saying this at all. Love is one thing, sex is another. They can be separated out, or they can be combined. I can love a male friend deeply, but not have any sexual feelings for them at all. Ergo, for me, love and sex are not the same thing.
BTW, personally, I’m unlikely to be attracted to an obese woman. Some might indeed call me shallow for this. I would say that’s just the way I am. It’s not a conscious decision.
:dubious:
love and lust aren’t the same thing, they aren’t even necessarily connected.
IIRC one of the classical Greek philosophers said there were four types of love - “brotherly” love between good friends, love of family, “true” love (i.e. to them, between a man and a woman, get married, live happily ever after etc.), and lust.
To the point, I have some very close (also male) friends who I get along with like a house on fire and can talk with for hours, I love them as friends. I love my family too. I have some women friends who I love as friends as well, but only platonically (even though they’re hot, I just don’t want to have sex with them). And then there are the women I want to screw. Hopefully I’ll someday meet a woman who I love as a person, AND that I want to screw, who returns the sentiment. That would be a loving relationship, right?
So, to try to answer your OP: if I “dump” a guy who is/would be my best friend just because he’s a guy I’d be a fool, if I was doing it because I wouldn’t shag him. The same way I’d be an idiot if I “dumped” a woman who was my best friend just because I realised I didn’t want to boink her either.
I guess all this crap I just wrote boils down to love for people being separate from lust or sexual attraction.
Does any of this make any sense?
No, I didn’t mean to ask this. I have no problem with sexual preferences. I prefer women myself. I would not be sexually attracted to a very fat woman. I understand this.
**
Let’s, for the purpose of this discussion, define “love” as “romantic love”. You know, having dinner and gazing into the other’s eyes all evening. Butterflies in the stomach. Calling up every few minutes just to hear that voice. Would it be impossible for you to have that with a man, and if so, why?
OK, now I getcha. Well for me, romantic love is intimately connected to sex. Therefore I wouldn’t ever get as far as romantic love with a male, no matter how much I loved them fraternally.
Yes, that would be impossible, because romantic love by definition is love combined with sexual attraction. If there is no sexual attraction, there is no romantic love. That does not eliminate platonic love. The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
Priceguy, there are several types of love and not all of them have to include sex in order to be considered true love.
Examples:
I love my mommy, I love my son, and I love my dog. All of which as you described in your OP I have fun with just about evey time we hang out.
From what you’re saying is that if I love my mother, dog and son enough that its ok to fuck them. Clearly its not.
Or what might be happening here is you never thought of yourself as gay untill you met someone have alot of fun hanging out: then all of the sudden you have sexual urges towards this person. If thats the case, no big deal you just learned something new about yourself thats all.
I know that. I meant romantic love, as I said above. A bit tardily, perhaps.
Why does everyone assume I’m gay? I’ve never even French kissed a guy. I wouldn’t mind, but I haven’t done it.
Jjimm, friedo: OK. That’s a good answer. To you, romantic love and sex are inextricably connected. Would you consider it morally OK for a man to leave his wife of ten years because she suffers from vaginismus which leaves her unable to have intercourse?
Note that I said sexual attraction, not sex specifically. Anyway, regarding your question, it is a truism that lack of sex can in many cases be an extremely difficult burden on a relationship. That’s not moral or immoral, it’s just the way human brains are set up. And not knowing the specific intimate details of the hypothetical couple’s relationship, I would not be prepared to make a moral judgment on the man’s decision. Lack of sex may be a factor in the loss of a loving relationship, or it may not. It depends on the people.
That’s a bit of a non-sequiteur. I see why “dislocated” is in your location. 
To be honest, on this issue I have no idea. It’s a very sad scenario you’re suggesting, but presumably not uncommon. I’d guess it would be down to the individuals involved, and whether or not they felt that the sex part of the marriage is more or less important than the companionship; what treatment the wife was prepared to take; whether her condition was incurable; what other sexual outlets the man has; how the wife feels about these.