I got into a discussion with a friend of mine the other day about sex vs companionship. The discussion basically concerned whether someone would give up sex in a relationship for companionship. I’m speaking mostly in situations where sex is an impossibility for whatever reason on either partner’s part. I personally prefer the companionship with someone special over sex with just anyone. I’m curious now, though, how many people would give up sex in this situation? Just how important is sex to a relationship?
Tough, one, Am.
I feel that sex is a very vital part of a healthy, loving relationship. (duh)
I would stay with the woman I loved if the sex BECAME an impossibility, but I’m not exactly sure I would enter into that relationship if the sex were impossible first. Not sure how I feel about that, am I a BAD person?
Being on my own for the last two years, I’ve given this some thought. At first, I missed sex most. But as time went by, I found that what I was really missing was emotional intimacy. But the two are intertwined, for me anyway. I have a platonic friend who is extremely close, who I can hear anything from and say anything too, but no matter how close, it’s rare that our conversation is as warmly satisfying and enveloping as that which is shared between two people laying in bed after having big fun. So if I gave up sex, I fear that I would also be giving up a certain amount of non-sexual companionship.
If I absolutely had to choose though, I would give up sex. Though not nearly as satisfying to do so, sex is something I can take care of for myself. Companionship by definition requires a companion though.
Uncle Bill, I’m sure that you know you aren’t a bad person for desiring both aspects out of a relationship. Situations where companionship is possible, but sex is not happen all the time in the guise of friendships. It would be unusual to meet someone who would be unable to share sexual activities and yet would insist on otherwise living in a monogamous relationship. Like you, if I was in a situation where sex became impossible later in the relationship, I would stay with that person.
Does “sex” here mean all physical intimacy, or are we going by the Bill Clinton definition?
Personally, I have issues with Bill Clinton defined sex, so I could probably give it up fairly easily. Kissing, petting, and general making out, OTOH, I’d miss a lot.
Definitely need both if I’m in a relationship.
I’m selfish. I want it all…
UncleBill, you know I don’t think you’re a bad person! Wanting both doesn’t make you any less of a person, it’s natural. If I knew the answers I’d get, I wouldn’t have asked the question.
KKBattousai, I was thinking generally intercourse, but since the two go hand-in-hand, it could be a Monica as well. However, I don’t think it precludes the hugs, kisses, hand holding, or just lying in bed holding one another. That’s much more intimacy than sex, IMO.
For me, the intimacy is what matters. The sex (which I enjoy a lot) is fun, yeah, but what good is it if you have to give up spending your life with someone you love?
To be honest, I’m probably not the most qualified person to comment upon this, but I’ll toss in my two cents anyway.
I’d rather be with someone I care about, even if sex was an impossibility. Emotional intimacy is one of life’s most wonderful things, and sex pales by comparison, IMHO.
As you all well know…I have a VERY high sex drive.
Maybe it makes me shallow but…sex is one of the MANY ways I show my love to that special somebody.
Of course if I don’t have a special somebody I do have a fuckbuddy lined up to keep me from pulling out my hair:)
But when I do find THAT person I am completely faithful and have been known to fuck a few of them into comas.
I’d have to say I’d give up the sex. Companionship is(to me) far more important than bending in to some hormones. Of course thats not to say I wouldn’t want to bend into those hormones. Just that given circumstances that require one or the other, I would definately choose the companionship.
Get married, have three kids, open your own business, and then ask yourself this question in 20 years. Oh, and intersperse this bliss with a few trips to hell and back.
While sex is a good thing, a great thing…companionship is better.
Just my .02
Uh… what do I have to give up to get either one?
I doubt I’d enter into into a relationship knowing the possibilty of sex EVER was a big NO. Companionship is better, but what good is cranky, horny companionship? (And, yes I am talking about myself…I get cranky without sex…may take a LONG while until I get cranky, but I do.) If I were the one unable to have sex, I would not limit my mate to my companionship only. Life is to be lived, and sex is a part of life. Not a huge, overwhelming part, but a part. I would hope the one who’s companionship I desired felt the same as I do. I have a feeling they would, as I tend to be rather open and blunt about my needs and desires, but for me, love and sex are not mutually inclusive. I prefer to have both though. In an extreme case though, I MIGHT be able to give up sex with another person as long as I had the cuddling, kissing, snuggling, mental connection with the mate in question. As long my supply of batteries were unlimited. It’s a long shot, but I might be able to do it.
Well, I did for 6 months with my ex-fiancee, kinda. We literally went from having sex 3-4 times a day to having it 2 times our last half-year together, but I loved her with all my heart and was willing to do anything, sacrifice any of my own comfort or desires just to be with her.
Would I do it again? I hope I won’t have to, but I think I would. Love makes you do amazing things. Companionship and interpersonal relations can mean so much…
At lot depends on the age of the person asking it. Some people who say NO at 25 say yes at 55. You should be able to get both, particularly when you’re young. It’s a lot to give up. They’d really have to be special. Never say never, though.
Some things you should be aware of in conjunction with
my answer: A) I’m male B) I’m 25 C) I’m very much a loner type and can quite happily go weeks and weeks without
passing more than a casual comment with anyone.
The answer is quite simply “no way”. If I want
companionship, I have friends. Good friends, who I can
share anything with. But they cannot provide me with sex.
Sex is the extra thing that makes a male/female relationship
special. Without sex, a relationship is “merely” a friendship.
That’s my story and I’m sticking to it. Call me a
terrible, horrible person if it makes you feel better. ;]
Incidentally, I figured this question would be split
mostly down gender lines. Women saying “yeah, I could
deal with that” and guys saying, “no way.” I’m both
surprised and gratified to see some women saying they
would have a really hard time going without, too. So now
I guess my only complaint is… how come none of you
seem to live in my town? ;D
Isn’t that what happens when you get married?
If I had the sex to give up then of course I would, if I had to.
So, I’m getting something for nothing here, right?
Seriously, sex-crazed as I am, it’s companionship and intimacy that I find myself missing most during my dry spells. I’m going to have to waffle a bit and say that I wouldn’t try to develop a relationship in which I knew sex wasn’t a possibility. If such a relationship jumped out of the bushes, hit me with a frying pan, and dragged me off…well, I’d live with it. I could always date Mother Thumb and her four daughters on the side. I’d still miss giving pleasure, though.
In any relationship the time will come that sex takes a back seat. Just hope you and your SO will have things in common to discuss…do…play…whatever. A relationship based entirely on sex is doomed to die.
Yes. If it were the right person for me, and sex were absolutely out of the question, I would give it up. I would, however, spend a lot of time with my vibrator…