SD5 wrote:Again; sex ain't love, though lovers can share it.
so again...
bellybelle wrote:(Love) is the sweetest scent on the person you wake to
I mean, are we supposed to dismiss sex entirely? And the minute someone has a sexual thought, the possibility of it actually being Love goes out the window. Are we that sexually repressed as a culture/people that sex will always be bad, false, trite, base, even in the most decent unions, i.e. when two people love each other.....?
maybe i can translate the original statement into uncomplicated vernacular, which would make it this...
"Love is the best thing to smell on the person you're having sex with."
Crass and rude, to the point.
As for sex free...I dated a gent a few years back for 2 years and we never slept together for it. I felt I loved him, but being honest with myself, I found I would not be able to connect with him the way I should to have the love thing. That doesn't mean we failed because everything was strictly hormonal? Everything wasn't. But why should I deny the importance of sex to a happy love life? Yes there are jail couples and people separated by distance who love and don't touch....but I don't think they'd choose to abstain if put in the same place, especially if they love each other.
Lets just suppose not all people are having sex all willy nilly. Lets suppose that there are some people who are a bit more calculated and thoughtful in their approach--who view sex as not just a recreational activity, but as an opportunity to bond with a person and say things they are no longer able to articulate, through touch. Is it necessary to deny them the physical and spiritual benefits of coitus because we think of sex as base? Does our opinion of what sex has become detract from what it can mean between those who enjoy expressing their love this way?
Love making is a beautiful thing. Just because the movements are the same as fucking, it doesn't make it the same thing.