Poll: would you marry someone even if it meant giving up sex forever?

[Sir Fredrick]

This is a hypothetical question, let's pretend that the reason is beyond your control and it's also beyond your partner's control for whatever reason. Would you give up ALL forms of sex to be with them if you felt that you really truly loved them?

Edit: By all forms of sex I mean anything sexual would be out of the question.

 

[Riprorin]

That's usually what happens when you get married.

 

[Viper GTS]

In a heartbeat.

Viper GTS

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Let's face it, I was probably never gonig to have sex again anyway

 

[Sir Fredrick]

Hey Viper, are you still banned? The site in your profile seems to think so.

 

[notfred]

You're missing a big part of the point of marriage, there.

 

[Mookow]

I have a feeling this isnt totally hypothetical. I remember your post about what happened to your g/f and the consequences of that.

Anyway, on one hand, in your "hypothetical case", you love the woman. So it should be a yes. OTOH, no sex, ever, for the rest of your life does suck more than a little, but I guess you came to this conclusion and wanted some help, and thus posted about it. I'll have to think about this for a little...

EDIT: cant spell

 

[ThaGrandCow]

Probably not... the only real way to keep someone from any kind of sex at all would be if they had no arms or legs, had their mouth sewed shut, and wore a chastity belt. I think even then someone might get anxious and try for some un-conventional orifices... Ears anyone?

Plus I think if they were that messed up I probably wouldn't be marrying them in the first place.

 

[notfred]

remember that "no sex" means "no kids".... whether that's good or bad is up to you.

 

[Sir Fredrick]

Mookow, wow I'm surprised you remembered that...posted about that quite a while ago.
I'm not even going out with her anymore, I broke up with her for reasons unrelated to sex. She is convinced that it was because she had no interest in sex...so that got me thinking and wondering how many people here would be willing to marry their true love if it meant no sex ever.

For her I was willing, or would have been if everything worked out, but the sexual frustration IS very difficult to deal with, so I'd probably avoid getting into a situation like that again. In other words, in the future I will probably avoid getting into a relationship with someone who has a serious aversion to all things sexual.

 

[Sir Fredrick]

<< remember that "no sex" means "no kids".... whether that's good or bad is up to you. >>



In most marriages, "kids" seems to mean "no sex".

 

[Orsorum]

<< Let's face it, I was probably never gonig to have sex again anyway >>



Wow, now that's defeatist...

 

[phlashphire]

<< remember that "no sex" means "no kids".... whether that's good or bad is up to you >>


Could always adopt...

 

[Lars]

<< That's usually what happens when you get married. >>



hehe

 

[Mookow]

<< For her I was willing, or would have been if everything worked out, but the sexual frustration IS very difficult to deal with, so I'd probably avoid getting into a situation like that again. In other words, in the future I will probably avoid getting into a relationship with someone who has a serious aversion to all things sexual. >>



Well, sex is something that brings two people together (or can). Its also an expression of trust (assuming its more than a drunken hookup, not that I personally have any objections to that). I dont think I would. Its a fairly integral part of marriage.

 

[Ionizer86]

If I found the perfect girl, but if we married, we couldn't have sex....I'd probably still marry her, but we'd have to adopt. But what's the probablility that there's any perfect girl out there....and what's the probablity that she'll like the imperfect me? And what's the probability that in a marriage, two people can't have sex?

 

[Deeko]

Uhh....yes? I'd take a lifetime of love and happiness over a little bit of physical gain.

 

[singh]

Of Course. Marriage is the union of two SOULS - not bodies

 

[Angrymarshmello]

No - I might love someone but I'm not going to give up having kids to be with them. (Can't have kids without sex - and while adoption is there, I just don't feel like I could care for him/her the same way as if they were my child. Not to say I wouldn't - it's just not entirely the same)

 

[DanFungus]

yes, because, that's what I thought first

 

[db]

You mean some people Don't give up sex forever when the get married?

 

[jeffrey]

I think it's important for people to see if they are sexually compatiable before they get married. However, if sex is out of the question for some reason it would have to depend on her attitude. If she would still show sexual interest and help you get off one way or another, then maybe.

 

[Kadarin]

Sex is a very important part of who we are, and I would not be willing to give it up.

 

[joohang]

No because I want some children.

 

[Mookow]

<< Mookow, wow I'm surprised you remembered that...posted about that quite a while ago. >>



It wasnt exactly your everyday event. *shrugs* (about me remembering, not about the event)



<< For her I was willing, or would have been if everything worked out, but the sexual frustration IS very difficult to deal with, so I'd probably avoid getting into a situation like that again. In other words, in the future I will probably avoid getting into a relationship with someone who has a serious aversion to all things sexual. >>



Yeah. The frustration might lead, eventually, to you getting bitter and transfering it to other aspects of your relationship. Which would make it an even less ideal marriage.

Anyway, its definitely not an ideal scenario to get into. Attempting to avoid it in the future is probably a pretty wise decision.