Thanks for the comment!
In my publication I said that sex is not a means for manipulation and not an obligatory requirement. I do not want to think that relationships are built primarily on sex. I do not think that it is worth thinking very narrowly - if there is no sex, then a person is no different from a friend. Friendship and relationships are different, even without sex. These are different roles, expectations and quality of interaction with a partner.
If we talk about sex in relationships, here I agree - do not be shy and be silent about your needs. Everyone has a different constitution. Someone needs sex once a week, someone several times a day. Sometimes partners simply do not fit together in physiology. But this does not give them the right to demand more or less sex from a partner than he can and wants to give.
P.S. My comparison with chocolate was ironic. You say sex allows you to reduce stress and anxiety, but chocolate also. This is a different way of getting calm, relieving stress and getting pleasure. And eating chocolate, too, does not always have only the physical component — a famine.
RE: How sex became a pathetic excuse for mistakes
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
How sex became a pathetic excuse for mistakes
I didn't say relationships are based on sex. Then one-night stand is a relationship which it is not. But sex is one of the most important things in a relationship. People don't really think of salt an important ingredient in the recipe and talk about fency stuff like basil, turmeric, coriander etc but without salt, it's not tasty. Eating chocolate decrease stress not eating it does not give stress (If you are not addicted to it, like cigarettes for me). I am not a chocolate fan so for me I can go on living without eating chocolate but I dont believe 99 percent of people will go on living without sex.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit