Importance

[hersforever08]

Hello!

So I've been thinking quiet a bit about sex in a relationship. And I've begun to question how important is it really? I know every relationship (long term) is based on basics of love and honesty and such but you hear everyone saying how important sex is to a relationship. And in the shallow relationships how it can make or break the relationship. Or how it saves marriages.

Not only have I only been thinking about sex I've been thinking about physicality in a relationship in general.

Is it necassary in a relationship to have physical contact on a regular? Is sex absolute in having the perfect realtionship? Every one makes such a big deal out of it. Is it what makes it a relationship? Because one person has many relationships...friends family coworkers...

I just don't know what to think any more. I really don't. Does any one know? What is your view?

Hersfoever08

[Zardoz]

Hello!

So I've been thinking quiet a bit about sex in a relationship. And I've begun to question how important is it really? I know every relationship (long term) is based on basics of love and honesty and such but you hear everyone saying how important sex is to a relationship. And in the shallow relationships how it can make or break the relationship. Or how it saves marriages.

Not only have I only been thinking about sex I've been thinking about physicality in a relationship in general.

Is it necassary in a relationship to have physical contact on a regular? Is sex absolute in having the perfect realtionship? Every one makes such a big deal out of it. Is it what makes it a relationship? Because one person has many relationships...friends family coworkers...

I just don't know what to think any more. I really don't. Does any one know? What is your view?

Hersfoever08

True love is a mental/emotional driving force. Sex is a physical act that may or may not be out of love. I think sex breaks more relationships than anything. I see so many people stay in bad/horrid relationships because they like their sex life with the individual in the situation. I think sex and most society's obsession with it has become very damaging in recent eras. People seem to now rely on sex mostly as an indication of love or how much they love someone. This is very unhealthy and why more than half of marriages fail.

What makes a relationship is a deep romantic bond with another being. This has NOTHING to do with sex. People confuse lust with love and that is rampant in many societies.

One can love before having sex (or without having sex) with someone and one can have sex with someone without loving them. Sex and love are independent and not interdependent.

Only in the modern era do we equate one to mean the other and confuse lust and love.

When people say sex is important in a relationship they really mean, " I think sex is important in my relationships with other people." If thats what they think, then they need to re-examine their lives and themselves. Ironically these same people tend to bitch about how they keep falling into one bad relationship after another. Of course they do, because theyre lusting after people with whom they have no real connection to emotionally. Anything with sex at the central axis of it is bound to fail miserably.

[Pamcakes]

If I may offer a view from someone who isn't Asexual (not to say Aces shouldn't post, just that a minority of people who don't feel a "need" for sexual interaction probably aren't the best folks to discuss its importance)...

It's not the end-all, but it is how the majority of people in the world instinctively and naturally express romantic affection, and deepen/strengthen romantic bonds. Regular (though frequency is dependent on each couple, and their unique level of libido), satisfying (this is very important, because bad sex is worse than none, emotionally and physically speaking) sexual involvement with each other is important to the maintenance of healthy romantic partnerships of Sexual people. Why? Because that's how we are. Why do we eat, and not simply takes nutrients in pill form? Because that's how we're designed. We can get by on the pill, survival-wise, but we'll probably never feel content without food - it's just a need (and please, no semantic arguments about whether necessity to survival is the only thing that constitutes 'need' - plenty of those threads elsewhere, if you really want them) we naturally have.

For Sexual folks, sexual attraction is an inherent part of the initial desire to form a romantic partnership with someone, and the satisfaction of that attraction to whatever degree the individuals require it (whether that be twice a day, weekly, once a month, bi-annually; whatever) is more or less vital to the upkeep of the emotional connection between them. In relationships where both partners are Sexual, and the sex has dropped off entirely, or is much less than one or both partners' libidos drive them to 'need', or has simply become bad/unsatisfying - either actively unpleasant, or they have just lost their sexual connection and it's become awkward - the emotional bond is placed under greater strain, as they are not 'renewing' it the way their instincts prompt them to. This doesn't mean they immediately stop loving each other, but it does mean they have less 'reserves' of tenderness and connection to draw upon when times get difficult. It weakens the relationship.

This is very unhealthy and why more than half of marriages fail.

Please provide evidence for this assertion.

P.

P.S. In case I was insufficiently clear, this only applies to romantic partnerships; friendships and filial relationships do not require sexual interaction to maintain their bond.

[Zardoz]

If I may offer a view from someone who isn't Asexual (not to say Aces shouldn't post, just that a minority of people who don't feel a "need" for sexual interaction probably aren't the best folks to discuss its importance)...

It's not the end-all, but it is how the majority of people in the world instinctively and naturally express romantic affection, and deepen/strengthen romantic bonds. Regular (though frequency is dependent on each couple, and their unique level of libido), satisfying (this is very important, because bad sex is worse than none, emotionally and physically speaking) sexual involvement with each other is important to the maintenance of healthy romantic partnerships of Sexual people. Why? Because that's how we are. Why do we eat, and not simply takes nutrients in pill form? Because that's how we're designed. We can get by on the pill, survival-wise, but we'll probably never feel content without food - it's just a need (and please, no semantic arguments about whether necessity to survival is the only thing that constitutes 'need' - plenty of those threads elsewhere, if you really want them) we naturally have.

For Sexual folks, sexual attraction is an inherent part of the initial desire to form a romantic partnership with someone, and the satisfaction of that attraction to whatever degree the individuals require it (whether that be twice a day, weekly, once a month, bi-annually; whatever) is more or less vital to the upkeep of the emotional connection between them. In relationships where both partners are Sexual, and the sex has dropped off entirely, or is much less than one or both partners' libidos drive them to 'need', or has simply become bad/unsatisfying - either actively unpleasant, or they have just lost their sexual connection and it's become awkward - the emotional bond is placed under greater strain, as they are not 'renewing' it the way their instincts prompt them to. This doesn't mean they immediately stop loving each other, but it does mean they have less 'reserves' of tenderness and connection to draw upon when times get difficult. It weakens the relationship.

This is very unhealthy and why more than half of marriages fail.

Please provide evidence for this assertion.

P.

P.S. In case I was insufficiently clear, this only applies to romantic partnerships; friendships and filial relationships do not require sexual interaction to maintain their bond.

Please provide evidence for this assertion.

Please provide evidence this is inaccurate.

Seriously, I tire of people demanding evidence for every little thing on AVEN. Even if I spent many hours compiling compelling studies and data, you as have many will simply dismiss it anyways. I would rather spend my time far more constructively. However you are more than welcome to waste your time, trying to prove me wrong over an insignificant point.

To ignore that sexual matters rank highly among reasons for divorce is simple ignorant. The fact of the matter is that many relationships are based around sex period. Reason for divorce in studies that are highly ranked among reasons revolve around sex as well. I dont think its unreasonable to say that many marriages fail when the sex dies down or out completely. They then assume they dont love said person anymore and end up divorced. This has been my personal experience among many that I know and have witnessed. Or am I not allowed to speak without citing study after study and science on a matter where there isnt sufficient science or study to really determine much of anything?

I am entitled to my views period.

[Sally]

To ignore that sexual matters rank highly among reasons for divorce is simple ignorant. The fact of the matter is that many relationships are based around sex period. Reason for divorce in studies that are highly ranked among reasons revolve around sex as well. I dont think its unreasonable to say that many marriages fail when the sex dies down or out completely. They then assume they dont love said person anymore and end up divorced. This has been my personal experience among many that I know and have witnessed. Or am I not allowed to speak without citing study after study and science on a matter where there isnt sufficient science or study to really determine much of anything?

I am entitled to my views period.

You are entitled to your views, but you aren't entitled to present them as fact.

Having spent all my adult life (except for the last 3 years) in marriage and partnership with sexuals, I'll give my view from my own experience. For sexuals, sex is an extremely important factor in relationships. It certainly isn't the only factor in marriages that either succeed or end in divorce. However, in a marriage where either one or both partners rate sex highly, if sex is not satisfactory, that MAY the marriage, even if other factors are satisfactory. That was the case in both my marriage and my long-term partnership.

Things aren't black-and-white in any relationship or marriage.

[Zardoz]

To ignore that sexual matters rank highly among reasons for divorce is simple ignorant. The fact of the matter is that many relationships are based around sex period. Reason for divorce in studies that are highly ranked among reasons revolve around sex as well. I dont think its unreasonable to say that many marriages fail when the sex dies down or out completely. They then assume they dont love said person anymore and end up divorced. This has been my personal experience among many that I know and have witnessed. Or am I not allowed to speak without citing study after study and science on a matter where there isnt sufficient science or study to really determine much of anything?

I am entitled to my views period.

You are entitled to your views, but you aren't entitled to present them as fact.

Having spent all my adult life (except for the last 3 years) in marriage and partnership with sexuals, I'll give my view from my own experience. For sexuals, sex is an extremely important factor in relationships. It certainly isn't the only factor in marriages that either succeed or end in divorce. However, in a marriage where either one or both partners rate sex highly, if sex is not satisfactory, that MAY the marriage, even if other factors are satisfactory. That was the case in both my marriage and my long-term partnership.

Things aren't black-and-white in any relationship or marriage.

It was never presented as fact in any capacity, nor have I stated it was fact. Nor could it be. This is just some people's perception. Yes many things contribute to the failure or marriages and every situation is different. However this changes with each situation and location and culture. My experiences are mine while others may have had differing experiences.

Every time I present a view immediately someone feels the need to invalidate or disprove it whether it can be or not, whether it is fact or experience. Bottom line is that I find it annoying that someone feels the need to invalidate it or demand scientific evidence. To disagree is welcome, to demand proof is absurd.

[Pamcakes]

Please provide evidence for this assertion.

Please provide evidence this is inaccurate.

Seriously, I tire of people demanding evidence for every little thing on AVEN. Even if I spent many hours compiling compelling studies and data, you as have many will simply dismiss it anyways. I would rather spend my time far more constructively. However you are more than welcome to waste your time, trying to prove me wrong over an insignificant point.

To ignore that sexual matters rank highly among reasons for divorce is simple ignorant. The fact of the matter is that many relationships are based around sex period. Reason for divorce in studies that are highly ranked among reasons revolve around sex as well. I dont think its unreasonable to say that many marriages fail when the sex dies down or out completely. They then assume they dont love said person anymore and end up divorced. This has been my personal experience among many that I know and have witnessed. Or am I not allowed to speak without citing study after study and science on a matter where there isnt sufficient science or study to really determine much of anything?

I am entitled to my views period.

No. You made the disputed claim, so the burden of proof is upon you. Any law student - or even anyone who's watched a courtroom drama - could tell you that that's how it works. In debating, in simple conversation, as in law.

If you don't want to have to prove it as fact, then don't state it as fact. The simply addition of "I believe..." or "I suspect..." at the beginning of your assertion would have negated any need for me to call for supporting evidence, and you wouldn't now have gotten yourself into such a tizzy about it.

If you don't like people asking you to present your arguments, when you offer a subjective opinion as an objective statement, in an intelligent and data-supported fashion, then maybe try to aim your declarations at people of a less intelligent/academic bent. Unfortunately, Aven is full of both professional and armchair intellectuals, who are unlikely to automatically accept allegations of dubious objectivity on face value simply because "That Zardoz seems like a really swell, well-informed, standup sort!", and so you might find that a rather challenging proposition. The alternative, of course, is that you simply research your assertions before making statements that present them as indisputable and verifiable truth.

It was never presented as fact in any capacity, nor have I stated it was fact.

Actually, you did. That's how the English language works; if you state something outright without qualifying it with self-reference, then that is how we communicate a statement of truth. If you meant only to reflect personal belief, you need to communicate that better using the standard conventions of the language.

Every time I present a view immediately someone feels the need to invalidate or disprove it whether it can be or not, whether it is fact or experience. Bottom line is that I find it annoying that someone feels the need to invalidate it or demand scientific evidence. To disagree is welcome, to demand proof is absurd.

It's not absurd at all. It's one of the fundamentals of debate.

The level of personal entitlement you seem to be indicating here strikes me as quite staggering.

P.

[Zardoz]

Please provide evidence for this assertion.

Please provide evidence this is inaccurate.

Seriously, I tire of people demanding evidence for every little thing on AVEN. Even if I spent many hours compiling compelling studies and data, you as have many will simply dismiss it anyways. I would rather spend my time far more constructively. However you are more than welcome to waste your time, trying to prove me wrong over an insignificant point.

To ignore that sexual matters rank highly among reasons for divorce is simple ignorant. The fact of the matter is that many relationships are based around sex period. Reason for divorce in studies that are highly ranked among reasons revolve around sex as well. I dont think its unreasonable to say that many marriages fail when the sex dies down or out completely. They then assume they dont love said person anymore and end up divorced. This has been my personal experience among many that I know and have witnessed. Or am I not allowed to speak without citing study after study and science on a matter where there isnt sufficient science or study to really determine much of anything?

I am entitled to my views period.

No. You made the disputed claim, so the burden of proof is upon you. Any law student - or even anyone who's watched a courtroom drama - could tell you that that's how it works. In debating, in simple conversation, as in law.

If you don't want to have to prove it as fact, then don't state it as fact. The simply addition of "I believe..." or "I suspect..." at the beginning of your assertion would have negated any need for me to call for supporting evidence, and you wouldn't now have gotten yourself into such a tizzy about it.

If you don't like people asking you to present your arguments, when you offer a subjective opinion as an objective statement, in an intelligent and data-supported fashion, then maybe try to aim your declarations at people of a less intelligent/academic bent. Unfortunately, Aven is full of both professional and armchair intellectuals, who are unlikely to automatically accept allegations of dubious objectivity on face value simply because "That Zardoz seems like a really swell, well-informed, standup sort!", and so you might find that a rather challenging proposition. The alternative, of course, is that you simply research your assertions before making statements that present them as indisputable and verifiable truth.

It was never presented as fact in any capacity, nor have I stated it was fact.

Actually, you did. That's how the English language works; if you state something outright without qualifying it with self-reference, then that is how we communicate a statement of truth. If you meant only to reflect personal belief, you need to communicate that better using the standard conventions of the language.

Every time I present a view immediately someone feels the need to invalidate or disprove it whether it can be or not, whether it is fact or experience. Bottom line is that I find it annoying that someone feels the need to invalidate it or demand scientific evidence. To disagree is welcome, to demand proof is absurd.

It's not absurd at all. It's one of the fundamentals of debate.

The level of personal entitlement you seem to be indicating here strikes me as quite staggering.

P.

Unfortunately for you, debating takes two people. I am debating nothing. I did not state anything as fact and I speak differently than others do period. The reason is personal but I do not communicate language the same precise way you do.

There is no personal entitlement going on but I do expect some civility to be shown. I should be able express myself without proof being demanded.

50% percent of first marriages, 67% of second and 74% of third marriages end in divorce, according to Jennifer Baker of the Forest Institute of Professional Psychology in Springfield, Missouri.

According to enrichment journal on the divorce rate in America:

The divorce rate in America for first marriage is 41%

The divorce rate in America for second marriage is 60%

The divorce rate in America for third marriage is 73%

Half of all marriages in the US end in divorce. This can be proven via court records but anything beyond that is unprovable.

I find internet debate to be completely useless as all it is, is two people arguing about a position that NO ONE on either side is going to change. Frankly, I have a better use of my time, than to spend hours debating things I could care less about to debate as it has no real outcome.

The fact that you expect everyone to communicate as you do is strikingly arrogant. So that can be said.

I expressed my view and nothing more. What annoys the piss out of me is that everyone things everything needs to be debated even personal views which is unable to be debated logically. I also think if someone intends to argue the opposing view or opposes a view or statement they should provide proof as to why it is inaccurate.

I dont give a crap about the law system so you can say that all you want, I dont care frankly. Frankly I think too many people are prone to debating or arguing useless things.

Now if it will make a difference to debate it, I might debate however, debating will accomplish or reward me with nothing for my time.

[Pamcakes]

Please provide evidence for this assertion.

Please provide evidence this is inaccurate.

Seriously, I tire of people demanding evidence for every little thing on AVEN. Even if I spent many hours compiling compelling studies and data, you as have many will simply dismiss it anyways. I would rather spend my time far more constructively. However you are more than welcome to waste your time, trying to prove me wrong over an insignificant point.

To ignore that sexual matters rank highly among reasons for divorce is simple ignorant. The fact of the matter is that many relationships are based around sex period. Reason for divorce in studies that are highly ranked among reasons revolve around sex as well. I dont think its unreasonable to say that many marriages fail when the sex dies down or out completely. They then assume they dont love said person anymore and end up divorced. This has been my personal experience among many that I know and have witnessed. Or am I not allowed to speak without citing study after study and science on a matter where there isnt sufficient science or study to really determine much of anything?

I am entitled to my views period.

No. You made the disputed claim, so the burden of proof is upon you. Any law student - or even anyone who's watched a courtroom drama - could tell you that that's how it works. In debating, in simple conversation, as in law.

If you don't want to have to prove it as fact, then don't state it as fact. The simply addition of "I believe..." or "I suspect..." at the beginning of your assertion would have negated any need for me to call for supporting evidence, and you wouldn't now have gotten yourself into such a tizzy about it.

If you don't like people asking you to present your arguments, when you offer a subjective opinion as an objective statement, in an intelligent and data-supported fashion, then maybe try to aim your declarations at people of a less intelligent/academic bent. Unfortunately, Aven is full of both professional and armchair intellectuals, who are unlikely to automatically accept allegations of dubious objectivity on face value simply because "That Zardoz seems like a really swell, well-informed, standup sort!", and so you might find that a rather challenging proposition. The alternative, of course, is that you simply research your assertions before making statements that present them as indisputable and verifiable truth.

It was never presented as fact in any capacity, nor have I stated it was fact.

Actually, you did. That's how the English language works; if you state something outright without qualifying it with self-reference, then that is how we communicate a statement of truth. If you meant only to reflect personal belief, you need to communicate that better using the standard conventions of the language.

Every time I present a view immediately someone feels the need to invalidate or disprove it whether it can be or not, whether it is fact or experience. Bottom line is that I find it annoying that someone feels the need to invalidate it or demand scientific evidence. To disagree is welcome, to demand proof is absurd.

It's not absurd at all. It's one of the fundamentals of debate.

The level of personal entitlement you seem to be indicating here strikes me as quite staggering.

P.

Unfortunately for you, debating takes two people. I am debating nothing. I did not state anything as fact and I speak differently than others do period. The reason is personal but I do not communicate language the same precise way you do.

There is no personal entitlement going on but I do expect some civility to be shown. I should be able express myself without proof being demanded.

50% percent of first marriages, 67% of second and 74% of third marriages end in divorce, according to Jennifer Baker of the Forest Institute of Professional Psychology in Springfield, Missouri.

According to enrichment journal on the divorce rate in America:

The divorce rate in America for first marriage is 41%

The divorce rate in America for second marriage is 60%

The divorce rate in America for third marriage is 73%

Half of all marriages in the US end in divorce. This can be proven via court records but anything beyond that is unprovable.

I find internet debate to be completely useless as all it is, is two people arguing about a position that NO ONE on either side is going to change. Frankly, I have a better use of my time, than to spend hours debating things I could care less about to debate as it has no real outcome.

The fact that you expect everyone to communicate as you do is strikingly arrogant. So that can be said.

I expressed my view and nothing more. What annoys the piss out of me is that everyone things everything needs to be debated even personal views which is unable to be debated logically. I also think if someone intends to argue the opposing view or opposes a view or statement they should provide proof as to why it is inaccurate.

I dont give a crap about the law system so you can say that all you want, I dont care frankly. Frankly I think too many people are prone to debating or arguing useless things.

Now if it will make a difference to debate it, I might debate however, debating will accomplish or reward me with nothing for my time.

Firstly, I never disputed the divorce rate, nor did I ask that you cite proof of it. I disputed and requested proof for your assertion that over-emphasis on sex is the reason for the high divorce rate.

And you can swear at me all you like, but I think you'll find that my language was always polite, even in dressing you down, and that the only incivility here has been yours.

P.

[Zardoz]

Please provide evidence for this assertion.

Please provide evidence this is inaccurate.

Seriously, I tire of people demanding evidence for every little thing on AVEN. Even if I spent many hours compiling compelling studies and data, you as have many will simply dismiss it anyways. I would rather spend my time far more constructively. However you are more than welcome to waste your time, trying to prove me wrong over an insignificant point.

To ignore that sexual matters rank highly among reasons for divorce is simple ignorant. The fact of the matter is that many relationships are based around sex period. Reason for divorce in studies that are highly ranked among reasons revolve around sex as well. I dont think its unreasonable to say that many marriages fail when the sex dies down or out completely. They then assume they dont love said person anymore and end up divorced. This has been my personal experience among many that I know and have witnessed. Or am I not allowed to speak without citing study after study and science on a matter where there isnt sufficient science or study to really determine much of anything?

I am entitled to my views period.

No. You made the disputed claim, so the burden of proof is upon you. Any law student - or even anyone who's watched a courtroom drama - could tell you that that's how it works. In debating, in simple conversation, as in law.

If you don't want to have to prove it as fact, then don't state it as fact. The simply addition of "I believe..." or "I suspect..." at the beginning of your assertion would have negated any need for me to call for supporting evidence, and you wouldn't now have gotten yourself into such a tizzy about it.

If you don't like people asking you to present your arguments, when you offer a subjective opinion as an objective statement, in an intelligent and data-supported fashion, then maybe try to aim your declarations at people of a less intelligent/academic bent. Unfortunately, Aven is full of both professional and armchair intellectuals, who are unlikely to automatically accept allegations of dubious objectivity on face value simply because "That Zardoz seems like a really swell, well-informed, standup sort!", and so you might find that a rather challenging proposition. The alternative, of course, is that you simply research your assertions before making statements that present them as indisputable and verifiable truth.

It was never presented as fact in any capacity, nor have I stated it was fact.

Actually, you did. That's how the English language works; if you state something outright without qualifying it with self-reference, then that is how we communicate a statement of truth. If you meant only to reflect personal belief, you need to communicate that better using the standard conventions of the language.

Every time I present a view immediately someone feels the need to invalidate or disprove it whether it can be or not, whether it is fact or experience. Bottom line is that I find it annoying that someone feels the need to invalidate it or demand scientific evidence. To disagree is welcome, to demand proof is absurd.

It's not absurd at all. It's one of the fundamentals of debate.

The level of personal entitlement you seem to be indicating here strikes me as quite staggering.

P.

Unfortunately for you, debating takes two people. I am debating nothing. I did not state anything as fact and I speak differently than others do period. The reason is personal but I do not communicate language the same precise way you do.

There is no personal entitlement going on but I do expect some civility to be shown. I should be able express myself without proof being demanded.

50% percent of first marriages, 67% of second and 74% of third marriages end in divorce, according to Jennifer Baker of the Forest Institute of Professional Psychology in Springfield, Missouri.

According to enrichment journal on the divorce rate in America:

The divorce rate in America for first marriage is 41%

The divorce rate in America for second marriage is 60%

The divorce rate in America for third marriage is 73%

Half of all marriages in the US end in divorce. This can be proven via court records but anything beyond that is unprovable.

I find internet debate to be completely useless as all it is, is two people arguing about a position that NO ONE on either side is going to change. Frankly, I have a better use of my time, than to spend hours debating things I could care less about to debate as it has no real outcome.

The fact that you expect everyone to communicate as you do is strikingly arrogant. So that can be said.

I expressed my view and nothing more. What annoys the piss out of me is that everyone things everything needs to be debated even personal views which is unable to be debated logically. I also think if someone intends to argue the opposing view or opposes a view or statement they should provide proof as to why it is inaccurate.

I dont give a crap about the law system so you can say that all you want, I dont care frankly. Frankly I think too many people are prone to debating or arguing useless things.

Now if it will make a difference to debate it, I might debate however, debating will accomplish or reward me with nothing for my time.

Firstly, I never disputed the divorce rate, nor did I ask that you cite proof of it. I disputed and requested proof for your assertion that over-emphasis on sex is the reason for the high divorce rate.

And you can swear at me all you like, but I think you'll find that my language was always polite, even in dressing you down, and that the only incivility here has been yours.

P.

Ive sworn where and how at you of all thing? Im confused about that part.

Sex is rated high on the list of reasons giving by different organizations but its not able to be verified in any meaningful way. Your opinions are yours. *shrugs*

What does it accomplish either verifying or disproving that view? Nothing.

[Pamcakes]

I expressed my view and nothing more. What annoys the piss out of me is that everyone things everything needs to be debated even personal views which is unable to be debated logically. I also think if someone intends to argue the opposing view or opposes a view or statement they should provide proof as to why it is inaccurate.

I dont give a crap about the law system so you can say that all you want, I dont care frankly. Frankly I think too many people are prone to debating or arguing useless things.

Now if it will make a difference to debate it, I might debate however, debating will accomplish or reward me with nothing for my time.

They may not be the 'f' and 'c' words, but I doubt you'll find anyone who denies that they're swears.

Regardless, I don't particularly want to have an argument with you; your original language made it seem as though you were stating a point, I asked for evidence to support it, you got offended that I asked, I got annoyed that you had gotten offended and pointed out the source of the original miscommunication with perhaps less patience than I ought to have (the reason I got annoyed is because your initial response came off to me as, "Waaaah! Everyone's being mean to me by asking for references for my assertions!", which may not have been your intention but was definitely how I perceived it), then you used poor language in a response that seemed bitter in tone and you accused me of incivility, and I pointed out that the only uncivil language used had been by you.

I don't want to have an argument, because now that you have clarified your original statement was meant to be one of opinion and not faux-fact, why would I argue? It's not possible for an opinion to be wrong, such is their nature.

But, just for clarity, I never denied that a failing sex life might contribute to the decline of a marriage; I simply called shenanigans on the "statement" that over-emphasis of sex is solely responsible for much of the current high divorce rate.

P.

[Zardoz]

I expressed my view and nothing more. What annoys the piss out of me is that everyone things everything needs to be debated even personal views which is unable to be debated logically. I also think if someone intends to argue the opposing view or opposes a view or statement they should provide proof as to why it is inaccurate.

I dont give a crap about the law system so you can say that all you want, I dont care frankly. Frankly I think too many people are prone to debating or arguing useless things.

Now if it will make a difference to debate it, I might debate however, debating will accomplish or reward me with nothing for my time.

They may not be the 'f' and 'c' words, but I doubt you'll find anyone who denies that they're swears.

Regardless, I don't particularly want to have an argument with you; your original language made it seem as though you were stating a point, I asked for evidence to support it, you got offended that I asked, I got annoyed that you had gotten offended and pointed out the source of the original miscommunication with perhaps less patience than I ought to have (the reason I got annoyed is because your initial response came off to me as, "Waaaah! Everyone's being mean to me by asking for references for my assertions!", which may not have been your intention but was definitely how I perceived it), then you used poor language in a response that seemed bitter in tone and you accused me of incivility, and I pointed out that the only uncivil language used had been by you.

I don't want to have an argument, because now that you have clarified your original statement was meant to be one of opinion and not faux-fact, why would I argue? It's not possible for an opinion to be wrong, such is their nature.

But, just for clarity, I never denied that a failing sex life might contribute to the decline of a marriage; I simply called shenanigans on the "statement" that over-emphasis of sex is solely responsible for much of the current high divorce rate.

P.

In my culture, they're not swear words. But dont assume everyone would agree they're swear words. Not everyone has the same culture or definition of swear words. I didnt intend to offend you with swear words.

I also was not offended. I just get asked a lot for evidence for many things when I try to express my views it seems on this site. Even if it is something that is very minor or common sense and it isnt something I enjoy at all and other sites Ive been to arent like that. I just like sitting back and shooting the breeze in a relaxed manner. Its how people in my area and culture roll per se.

I definitely am not the type to ever act or say everyone's being mean to me. Thats your perception however and youre entitled to it.

Bottom line is a lot of assumptions were made and misunderstandings occurred and none of it was intended.

I didnt intend to come across as the sole reason but I do believe it is a very strong and often the main reason in my experience with my people in my locale.

Internet words dont have tones its all perception.

[Sally]

I did not state anything as fact

From a previous post of yours: "The fact of the matter is that many relationships are based around sex period."

You really cannot expect to contradict yourself in an argument and not get called on it.

[Zardoz]

I did not state anything as fact

From a previous post of yours: "The fact of the matter is that many relationships are based around sex period."

You really cannot expect to contradict yourself in an argument and not get called on it.

Way to take something out of context from one post to fit another in true internet style. *claps* Bravo! Are most relationships sexual? Yes. Do many of these revolve around sex? Yes. This isnt rocket science.

As far as that quote goes, "The fact of the matter" is a variation on "As a matter of fact".

Adv. 1. as a matter of fact - in reality or actuality; "in fact, it was a wonder anyone survived"; "painters who are in fact anything but unsophisticated"; "as a matter of fact, he is several inches taller than his father"

Meaning in reality.

Had I stated it as fact, I would have said Studies show all relationships are based on sex. Or the sex institute of based in boca raton,FL says 87% of relationships are based on sex. Those are stating something as fact.

Saying, the fact of the matter is not. It is an expression meaning the reality or the truth. Take the above example. , "painters who are in fact anything but unsophisticated". Does this mean its a fact that painters are unsophisticated? No. It means that the person who said it thinks that in reality, they are. This also is not presenting something as fact.

[shaedofblue]

"Crap" and "piss" are words that add no meaning in this context and exist only to increase emphasis by adding vulgarity to the phrase.

They are by definition swear words, unless "your culture" is "the 1400s," in which case only blasphemy is.

Also, when you say something is a fact, or is true "in reality," you are stating it as a fact.

[Zardoz]

"Crap" and "piss" are words that add no meaning in this context and exist only to increase emphasis by adding vulgarity to the phrase.

They are by definition swear words, unless "your culture" is "the 1400s," in which case only blasphemy is.

Also, when you say something is a fact, or is true "in reality," you are stating it as a fact.

Apparently you are unable to comprehend my prior post. FAIL. Thank you for playing though, Jonny tell them what theyve won!

I said the fact of the matter is which is an expression. Not stating something as fact. I have clarified this issue. My culture and locale does not consider such words to be vulgar. I fail to see why you think the 1400s has any bearing on what is or is not acceptable in my culture and locality.

Your entire post adds no meaning to this thread as it is quite redundant.

In reality, pasta is disgusting, is not a fact it is a VIEW. As a matter of fact, pasta is disgusting is also not a fact but also a view. I fail to see how your claims (which contraindict dictionaries, thesauruses and similar reference books) stand up. The problem is I used an expression which everyone saw fit to misread apparently and then use to claim I meant something I did not even after I have continuously clarified what I have said, what I had meant and where I stand on the issue.

[Sally]

Zardoz, you seem to be insulting everyone who posts. I doubt if that's your intention.

[Nameless123]

When people say sex is important in a relationship they really mean, " I think sex is important in my relationships with other people." If thats what they think, then they need to re-examine their lives and themselves.

I'm always amazed when asexual (or rather anti-sexual) people get on their high horse and judge the lives and relationships of sexual people. No, wait, "amazed" isn't the right word, it's actually "annoyed".

Do you need to re-examine your life and yourself for not wanting sex to be an important part of your relationships?

[Zardoz]

Zardoz, you seem to be insulting everyone who posts. I doubt if that's your intention.

No it is not my intention. My intention is merely for people to understand what I have said and where I stand. Although it has been frustrating trying to get that across clearly because of misinterpretation.

[Zardoz]

When people say sex is important in a relationship they really mean, " I think sex is important in my relationships with other people." If thats what they think, then they need to re-examine their lives and themselves.

I'm always amazed when asexual (or rather anti-sexual) people get on their high horse and judge the lives and relationships of sexual people. No, wait, "amazed" isn't the right word, it's actually "annoyed".

Do you need to re-examine your life and yourself for not wanting sex to be an important part of your relationships?

Nope I dont. Im also not anti-sexual. It isnt a matter or wanting or not wanting sex to be a part of my life. I just have zero desire for sex period. Its not like I woke up and said Oh well I hate sex, I dont want it to be part of my life. Rather Ive never had any real desire for it. I have a healthy life and healthy relationships with people.

My opinion is that saying sex is important or a main issue in a relationship, is very shallow and damaging. I have seen a lot of damage done in relationships and to people's lives over sex issues and one or the other partner placing way too much emphasis on sex or how much sex theyre getting or what type of sex theyre getting and so on. No one is damaged emotionally or otherwise from a lack of sex. :lol:

Sex should not be important in relationships period. This doesnt mean I think sex shouldnt be part of any relationship, I could care less what others do, so long as no one is harmed. Rather far too many people place too much emphasis on sex and ruin good things over silly things. So I am hard pressed to find, how I am anti-sexual?

At best one could say Im anti-oversexualized whether its people or media or society.

Overall I find it tacky, childish and ridiculous that a lot of people base someone elses value or relationship worthiness on sex and sometimes sex alone. This denotes extreme emotional immaturity. As one matures and ages one should find that sex is unimportant in the grand scheme of things but this just isnt so generally.

So you're annoyed? Do you find sex to be very important in a relationship? If so, why are you in an Asexual forum? Im not saying to leave, Im asking if sex is important why hang out with Asexuals? Because, certainly Asexuals are not going to agree with you at all and you SHOULD know this.

[Nameless123]

When people say sex is important in a relationship they really mean, " I think sex is important in my relationships with other people." If thats what they think, then they need to re-examine their lives and themselves.

I'm always amazed when asexual (or rather anti-sexual) people get on their high horse and judge the lives and relationships of sexual people. No, wait, "amazed" isn't the right word, it's actually "annoyed".

Do you need to re-examine your life and yourself for not wanting sex to be an important part of your relationships?

Nope I dont. Im also not anti-sexual. It isnt a matter or wanting or not wanting sex to be a part of my life. I just have zero desire for sex period. Its not like I woke up and said Oh well I hate sex, I dont want it to be part of my life. Rather Ive never had any real desire for it. I have a healthy life and healthy relationships with people.

My opinion is that saying sex is important or a main issue in a relationship, is very shallow and damaging. I have seen a lot of damage done in relationships and to people's lives over sex issues and one or the other partner placing way too much emphasis on sex or how much sex theyre getting or what type of sex theyre getting and so on. No one is damaged emotionally or otherwise from a lack of sex. :lol:

Sex should not be important in relationships period. This doesnt mean I think sex shouldnt be part of any relationship, I could care less what others do, so long as no one is harmed. Rather far too many people place too much emphasis on sex and ruin good things over silly things. So I am hard pressed to find, how I am anti-sexual?

At best one could say Im anti-oversexualized whether its people or media or society.

Overall I find it tacky, childish and ridiculous that a lot of people base someone elses value or relationship worthiness on sex and sometimes sex alone. This denotes extreme emotional immaturity. As one matures and ages one should find that sex is unimportant in the grand scheme of things but this just isnt so generally.

So you're annoyed? Do you find sex to be very important in a relationship? If so, why are you in an Asexual forum? Im not saying to leave, Im asking if sex is important why hang out with Asexuals? Because, certainly Asexuals are not going to agree with you at all and you SHOULD know this.

I'm asexual, if you must know, but I'm still able to see that 99% of the world aren't, and for them sex is important. To what degree differs a lot within all sexual relationships, by the way. Placing too much importance on sex can be damaging, no one doubts that. But what is "too much" within a relationship between two people is for them to decide, not you.

Generally here in the asexual community people hate it when sexual people tell them to try sex and that it's not so bad and that they have something wrong with them for not being into sex. But, turning the tables on sexual people and telling them that they should want less sex or place less importance on it is... well, annoying. Live and let live, it's really very easy.

[Zardoz]

When people say sex is important in a relationship they really mean, " I think sex is important in my relationships with other people." If thats what they think, then they need to re-examine their lives and themselves.

I'm always amazed when asexual (or rather anti-sexual) people get on their high horse and judge the lives and relationships of sexual people. No, wait, "amazed" isn't the right word, it's actually "annoyed".

Do you need to re-examine your life and yourself for not wanting sex to be an important part of your relationships?

Nope I dont. Im also not anti-sexual. It isnt a matter or wanting or not wanting sex to be a part of my life. I just have zero desire for sex period. Its not like I woke up and said Oh well I hate sex, I dont want it to be part of my life. Rather Ive never had any real desire for it. I have a healthy life and healthy relationships with people.

My opinion is that saying sex is important or a main issue in a relationship, is very shallow and damaging. I have seen a lot of damage done in relationships and to people's lives over sex issues and one or the other partner placing way too much emphasis on sex or how much sex theyre getting or what type of sex theyre getting and so on. No one is damaged emotionally or otherwise from a lack of sex. :lol:

Sex should not be important in relationships period. This doesnt mean I think sex shouldnt be part of any relationship, I could care less what others do, so long as no one is harmed. Rather far too many people place too much emphasis on sex and ruin good things over silly things. So I am hard pressed to find, how I am anti-sexual?

At best one could say Im anti-oversexualized whether its people or media or society.

Overall I find it tacky, childish and ridiculous that a lot of people base someone elses value or relationship worthiness on sex and sometimes sex alone. This denotes extreme emotional immaturity. As one matures and ages one should find that sex is unimportant in the grand scheme of things but this just isnt so generally.

So you're annoyed? Do you find sex to be very important in a relationship? If so, why are you in an Asexual forum? Im not saying to leave, Im asking if sex is important why hang out with Asexuals? Because, certainly Asexuals are not going to agree with you at all and you SHOULD know this.

I'm asexual, if you must know, but I'm still able to see that 99% of the world aren't, and for them sex is important. To what degree differs a lot within all sexual relationships, by the way. Placing too much importance on sex can be damaging, no one doubts that. But what is "too much" within a relationship between two people is for them to decide, not you.

Generally here in the asexual community people hate it when sexual people tell them to try sex and that it's not so bad and that they have something wrong with them for not being into sex. But, turning the tables on sexual people and telling them that they should want less sex or place less importance on it is... well, annoying. Live and let live, it's really very easy.

Have I decided or said what is too much sex? Absolutely not. Is the world at large very sexually focused and over sexualized? Very much so and many sexuals agree on this.

If youre Asexual, which I didnt care whether I knew if you were or not for the record, how can you decide how important sex is as a whole for people? If you do not have the desire, how can you speak for those who do?

Im not saying people should want less sex. I am saying that sex should not be a main criteria or breaking issue among relationships. That is, too much value in a relationship is often placed on sexual things.

Why are you annoyed by something you do not even participate in? I mean if people say sexuals should look beyond just sex or mainly sex, in relationships and it would be healthier for those people to look at deeper things in a relationship, why be annoyed by this when you have no desire for sex?

Again Im not trying to regulate other peoples sex lives nor am I anti-sexual. I am merely suggesting sexual things should not be at the top of many peoples relationship checklists but it is. This is unfortunate and causes issues where there shouldnt be issues. I have seen so many ridiculous things among people I know. Ironically, most people I know have no idea I am an Asexual and tend to talk to me about relationship and dating issues as if I was their gay friend as it were.

[Nameless123]

Why are you annoyed by something you do not even participate in? I mean if people say sexuals should look beyond just sex or mainly sex, in relationships and it would be healthier for those people to look at deeper things in a relationship, why be annoyed by this when you have no desire for sex?

I am annoyed because this kind of argument lumps all sexual people together and claims they all place too much importance on sex. Which is simply not true. And I think that especially from the asexual perspective it is wrong to judge sexual people. We don't understand what sex is to them, so we have no right to judge their need for it or the importance it has in their lives. It's ludicrous to say it's too much when we don't understand the importance at all.

[Zardoz]

Why are you annoyed by something you do not even participate in? I mean if people say sexuals should look beyond just sex or mainly sex, in relationships and it would be healthier for those people to look at deeper things in a relationship, why be annoyed by this when you have no desire for sex?

I am annoyed because this kind of argument lumps all sexual people together and claims they all place too much importance on sex. Which is simply not true. And I think that especially from the asexual perspective it is wrong to judge sexual people. We don't understand what sex is to them, so we have no right to judge their need for it or the importance it has in their lives. It's ludicrous to say it's too much when we don't understand the importance at all.

It does not claim ALL sexual people place too much emphasis on sex. I am saying MANY do which is accurate in my experiences.

It isnt ludicrous to see the damage done to society as a whole by over-sexualization. It also isnt ludicrous to see how over-emphasis of sex in relationships leads to destroying what is otherwise a good thing. This over-sexualization is mostly a modern issue and wasnt as much of an issue prior to the modern years of the last century.

There are A LOT of sexual deviants in the world as well as sex addicts. I dont quite see any Asexual Addicts nor Asexual Deviants.

My issue isnt sex or sexuals but rather the over magnification of sex in the world at large and relationships to the point of being psychologically damaging or unhealthy which is more common than many are aware of.

My issue is that *MANY* sexuals place too much weight of the relationship on sex. Do you even know how many people have confided in me that their marriage or relationship had ended because they werent having as much sex as they would have liked. Im talking minor differences, not no sex in the relationship but maybe a few times a week instead of every day and yes this is often an issue Ive seen in relationships that people have confided in me about. Or because theyre only having sex a couple times a week or slightly less they have gone out and cheated to make up for their lack of sex.

I think that sexuals who try to force their requirements on others who arent that way, and they full well knew this from the beginning, are absurdly immoral and ridiculous individuals.

The survey did find some common scenarios, however. Cheating tends to happen well into the relationship — especially in the three- to five-year zone — by a man who is dissatisfied with his sex life...

What drives people to cheat? Boredom? The thrill of the forbidden?

Many thrive on the excitement they get from a fling (30 percent overall), but men and women are generally prowling for different things. Men want more sex (44 percent), more satisfying sex (38 percent) and variety (40 percent), findings that closely resemble the 2006 MSNBC.com/Elle magazine survey on monogamy.

Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17951664/ns/health-sexual_health

Generally a fair number of people cheat and a majority of the reasons are sexual in nature, either needing the feeling of being sexually desirable (female correspondents) or Due to wanting more or better sex (male correspondents).

I think it is ridiculous to damage people and relationships over sexual issues especially when many people, men especially refuse to even discuss issues with their partners. They tend to complain to third parties or just cheat.

What we have here is a failure to communicate... lol

Overall is sex really so important that a fair number of people risk damaging their children and spouses with affairs? This is insane! It is no secret that sex completely clouds the mind. Science, religion, philosophy, psychology and many sects of knowledge have observed this for a very very long time now.

The old psychologist joke (albeit true) is that everything is about sex except sex. lol

[Olivier]

In reality, pasta is disgusting, is not a fact it is a VIEW. As a matter of fact, pasta is disgusting is also not a fact but also a view. I fail to see how your claims (which contraindict dictionaries, thesauruses and similar reference books) stand up. The problem is I used an expression which everyone saw fit to misread apparently and then use to claim I meant something I did not even after I have continuously clarified what I have said, what I had meant and where I stand on the issue.

If everyone is misreading you, then the problem is you. In this case you're arguing that because many people misuse "as a matter of fact" (in the same way that people misuse "literally" by using it when they mean the exact opposite), that whenever we see "as a matter of fact" we should remember that some people misuse this phrase and assume that therefore you do, and that therefore you mean the opposite of what you wrote. To get offended because some people didn't assume you were making a common error seems, well, odd.

It is no secret that sex completely clouds the mind.

Oh, just.... fuck off.

[Mr. Addams]

It is no secret that sex completely clouds the mind.

Oh, just.... fuck off.

Seconded.

You know, Zardoz, when you throw an offending statement like that into the fray, no wonder we react and ask you where you get it from, because honestly, those are some sorry misconceptions you carry around..

[Nameless123]

I think that sexuals who try to force their requirements on others who arent that way, and they full well knew this from the beginning, are absurdly immoral and ridiculous individuals.

What does that have to do with anything? Apart from the fact that this can as well be said about an asexual. But then I suppose wanting to have sex and "forcing that requirement" on somebody else is way worse than withholding sex from someone for whom it has great importance.

[Pamcakes]

Why are you annoyed by something you do not even participate in? I mean if people say sexuals should look beyond just sex or mainly sex, in relationships and it would be healthier for those people to look at deeper things in a relationship, why be annoyed by this when you have no desire for sex?

Zardoz...why are you making judgements on the importance of something you do not even participate in?

P.

[Nameless123]

Why are you annoyed by something you do not even participate in? I mean if people say sexuals should look beyond just sex or mainly sex, in relationships and it would be healthier for those people to look at deeper things in a relationship, why be annoyed by this when you have no desire for sex?

Zardoz...why are you making judgements on the importance of something you do not even participate in?

P.

Thank you, I've been meaning to point that out for a while.

[Zardoz]

In reality, pasta is disgusting, is not a fact it is a VIEW. As a matter of fact, pasta is disgusting is also not a fact but also a view. I fail to see how your claims (which contraindict dictionaries, thesauruses and similar reference books) stand up. The problem is I used an expression which everyone saw fit to misread apparently and then use to claim I meant something I did not even after I have continuously clarified what I have said, what I had meant and where I stand on the issue.

If everyone is misreading you, then the problem is you. In this case you're arguing that because many people misuse "as a matter of fact" (in the same way that people misuse "literally" by using it when they mean the exact opposite), that whenever we see "as a matter of fact" we should remember that some people misuse this phrase and assume that therefore you do, and that therefore you mean the opposite of what you wrote. To get offended because some people didn't assume you were making a common error seems, well, odd.

It is no secret that sex completely clouds the mind.

Oh, just.... fuck off.

I used as a matter of fact correctly as defined by the dictionary. I am not offended at any point in the conversation firstly. Secondly your statement makes no sense. I expect human beings who have english as a first language, to understand textbook definitions of phrases and words. I dont find that unreasonable.

I havent sworn at anyone and neither should you. Just because you disagree doesnt mean you should throw a tantrum.