Love or physical contact/attraction - which is more important in a relationship?

The ClubHouse: General Discussions - Jan -Apr. 2001: January: Love or physical contact/attraction - which is more important in a relationship?

Spamgirl

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 12:28 pm Click here to edit this post

If you had the choice between loving someone, but not being able to have meaningful physical contact with them (i.e. they're paralyzed so you can touch them, but they can't reciprocate) or leaving the person and possibly finding someone you will love equally and be able to be physical with, which would you choose?

Ocean_Islands

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 12:32 pm Click here to edit this post

Did you ever see that Star Trek episode about those extremely advanced aliens who no longer had bodies but were just brains in jars with tubes coming out all over and stuff?

They were in love. So if they can, so can humans.

Digilady

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 12:42 pm Click here to edit this post

They weren't humans, though, and we are.

That choice, though! Seems to me, love isn't turned off like a light. So, if you love A, who becomes paralyzed... you still love A.

Spamgirl

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 12:48 pm Click here to edit this post

CAN and want to are different...

I know of a couple and the husband got paralyzed... now they loved each other, but the woman was miserable after a while and needed more...

Cammie

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 01:41 pm Click here to edit this post

I'd choose love since it is mostly a "mind" thing. Physical gratification can be achievied...well..."other ways."

Spamgirl

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 02:04 pm Click here to edit this post

I would choose love 'cuz I get more than enough hugs from my daughter to make up for it...

Lafatme

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 02:12 pm Click here to edit this post

the title says love OR a physical relationship but your post says the physical relationship is with someone who you can love EQUALLY.

i'll answer both.

i will always choose love. the warmth it brings to my heart is too important to ignore. i want sex, but i NEED love.

in the other case i would have to choose both. i wouldn't stop loving the first person just because i found a second. it would be hard but i would do my best to give as much love as possible to both. i would try anyway.

Spamgirl

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 02:17 pm Click here to edit this post

nono... the idea is:

you love someone, they can no longer touch you (say paralyzed), would you leave them for someone who you could possibly love as much but also have a physical relationship (from hugging to porking ROFL) with?

Resortgirl

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 02:49 pm Click here to edit this post

Physical attraction is what draws you to a person and it's different for everyone. In my case it was my husbands soft voice and cowboy boots (and I don't normally like cowboy boots but they looked "hot" on him.) Love is something different, it's for the long haul and encompasses the respect and admiration you feel for someone and I don't think that would diminish because the person became paralyzed. Long term love sometimes loses some of the "passion" you felt at the beginning ( thank God, or we would never go to work, pay our bills , feed the cats)but is replaced by something so true and solid. So.... I pick Love!

Lafatme

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 03:00 pm Click here to edit this post

resort, i agree with most of what you said but disagree with the first sentence.

there are many beautiful women in the world to whom i am not attracted. attraction for me, at least, is to the person within the body, not the body itself.

it's nice when the body is attractive too, especially the eyes and smile. :-)

Resortgirl

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 04:08 pm Click here to edit this post

lafatme... I guess I worded it wrong. Take out the word physical. Attraction is different for everyone, in my case the sound of my husbands voice, and also the words he said touched my soul... and the cowboy boots didn't hurt! Personally I have never been attracted to your typical "handsome" man. I find beauty behind the eyes.

Twiggyish

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 04:14 pm Click here to edit this post

If your loved one became paralized and you didn't continue to love them.. It wasn't love in the first place. As I said in another post, love is unconditional.
If the situation was reversed and you were the one injured..think about that one. Would your mate continue to love you?

Resortgirl

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 04:19 pm Click here to edit this post

Although all your needs may not be met if your partner became paralyzed, twiggy is right if it was true love, you would still love that person. There are often sacrifices to be made for love.

Moondance

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 04:24 pm Click here to edit this post

Yes to Twiggy & RGirl (good to see ya posting so much!) That is when it moves out of romantic love and moves into a deeper love.

Merlin

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 06:03 pm Click here to edit this post

Good question Spammy.

I can say what I would think I would do in the case of:
you love someone, they can no longer touch you (say paralyzed), would you leave them for someone who you could possibly love as much but also have a physical relationship with?

By my loving the person, I could not leave them just for the sake of loving someone else who I could have a physical relationship with.

That does not imply that I would not miss the physical part with the one who was incapacitated. I would like to think that this desire would be channeled into finding a new way for the two of us to achieve this. In my way of thinking, they would have the same desires as prior to becoming paralyzed. Isn't sex about 80% mental? That would only leave the paralyzed one 20% short.

Lancecrossfire

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 06:37 pm Click here to edit this post

Merlin, you make an excellent point about the person who is paralyzed. They too would feel the same level of frustration as "us" (the person not paralyzed).

I guess how a person answers would be dependent upon their view of what sex is all about. Is sex a product of a working relationship, or is just about the physical gratification?? If it's a product of a good relationship, then I would think more would pick staying with the person they loved even though touching from them wouldn't happen as before. Just MHO

Flint

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 08:17 pm Click here to edit this post

Definitely good points Merlin.

I would go for love. While the physicality is part of love, and intimacy, it isn't the mostimportant part. There is a level of intimacy about true love that is much more than physical. I doubt I could describe it adequately.

Lalavoom

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 10:19 pm Click here to edit this post

I think this is more a question of honor and integrity rather than just a question of love.
Hopefully you honor the person you love and will stick by their side through "sickness and health".Who is going to admit they would leave the person they love when that person is at their most vulnerable hour? That is plain despicable. Despicable I tell you.

Sadly, people leave the ones they proclaim to love for reasons a lot more trivial. I agree with Resortgirl. In love as in life sacrifices must be made otherwise IT JUST DON'T WORK.
blahblahblah

Maire

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 10:41 pm Click here to edit this post

It seems to me like the answer we give is the one that is the proper. Because we want to do what we know is right. I mean, its easy for us to take this attitude if someone we know/knew left a spouse/partner after a tragic accident that leaves them disabled/paralyzed. We would think "how cold and calous of that person to do such a thing". However, I think in a situation like that, we can never truly know what we would/could do. There are many factors involved that could be inconceivable to anyone looking on the outside. For instance, maybe the relationship is strained, empty, shallow, already on the verge of a breakup. Or maybe the "healthy" partner isn't really healthy, having emotional and mental problems themselves, and to be dealt this kind of hand proves to more than that person can bare. We want people to do what's right, but only that person can judge for themselves what the right thing for them to do is. If I tell you that I would leave my partner, then I am judged based on your own perceptions of what you believe is right. We, as humans just have the tendency to be like that.

Very good, and thought provoking question Spammy.

Noslonna

Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 11:49 pm Click here to edit this post

If you love someone... you love them. If there are questions and doubts that is ok too... but you did not love them. Go and find your true love and you will not hesitate to be there through the bad times.

Misslibra

Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 12:44 am Click here to edit this post

Everyone have made some excellent points. I agree with Lafatme in saying both. And Spammy I know you said that is not what you mean't, but something had to attract you to that person in the first place. And if you fall in love with each other, and that person become cripple, it's hard to conceive leaving someone you love because of that. But I'm sure it's done.

But like Merlin said, or at least I think I read what he said correctly. Maybe they the couple would eventually come to a understanding, where one would be allowed to have intimacy with someone else.

I mean if I were to become cripple, I would hope that I would be understanding enough to my lover's physical needs for intimacy with another person. I mean after all we are feely touchy people, where we need that physical contact. And the love should be there in the first place if your in a serious relationship.

Lalavoom

Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 12:46 am Click here to edit this post

I must disagree with you Maire. For one thing, in the scenario Spam proposed you still love the paralyzed person. There are no problems in that area. The only problem is that you cannot be intimate. I agree with you that there could be any number of contributing factors in the ultimate break-up, but the question posed did not take these into account. The question was, would you leave your paralyzed love for another simply because they were paralyzed?

To intentionally turn your back on another human being in their time of need to me is despicable. I don't care what the reason is. Yes, that is my judgment based on my own perceptions. I have this annoying human tendency too.

Anyway, just because a human being can "judge for themselves what the right thing for them to do is" doesn't necessarily mean it is the right thing to do. In a world of one maybe so, but we live in a society and the thing that sucks about this is we have to take others into consideration.

According to your line of reasoning everybody should be able to do whatever it is they deem "right" and nobody else should judge them for it? Anarchy!

History has shown us time and time again the kind of human suffering that can occur when an individual or group decides to do what in their judgment, is right. Should we not judge this kind of righteousness?
~sorry, got a little carried away there~

Lafatme

Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 01:39 am Click here to edit this post

lala,

i think your post contradicts itself. in one paragraph you talk about society and taking others into consideration yet two paragraphs later you remind us of the danger of a group (society is a group) imposing it's idea of right.

societal "right" changes as society changes. 200 years ago slavery was right in many parts of the world. discrimination against women and gays was ok in our society very recently.

i think, if anything, history shows us that "society" has no idea what's right or wrong. even today there are societies all over the world who differ as to right and wrong. some think female circumcision is right, some think multiple wives are right, etc.

anarchy, to me, is where people do what they "want" as opposed to a freedom to do what's "right" as each person defines it. i have no problems with anyone trying to do the right thing, even if i think it's wrong. i admire the attempt. besides, when did i have the franchise on being right anyway?

the important thing is to treat others with respect and kindness. only the other person can determine if they are being treated that way or not.

Noslonna

Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 02:32 am Click here to edit this post

grrrr.... Lance she made perfect sense to me

Gail

Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 06:06 am Click here to edit this post

Nos . . . .why are you grrrring at Lance? Makes no sense to me.

Optics

Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 07:46 am Click here to edit this post

I know of a person in my area, who got married almost 15 years ago. A month after the wedding, the newlyweds travelled to Vancouver for husband to get surgery on back pain. They were in late 20's. Doctors messed up a simple operation, damaged spinal cord. The husband was left as a vegetable. The new wife was encouraged to turn off his life support. She didn't. She stayed faithful by his side. Lawsuit was launched and she was successful, the doctor had screwed up.
She used the money to fund his extensive care. He was not expected to survive past 2-3 years. Its now 15 years later. She certainly loved the man. Was at his bedside every single day. About 6-8 years later, she did meet another man. She made it absolutely clear to the new man - she would not ever leave the care of her husband or divorce him. Years have now passed, she and the new guy have had two children and live as a man and wife. However, she has never reneged on her obligations to the paralyzed husband, who miraculously still survives in "vegetable" state.
It is understood, by her current partner. Nonetheless, she has ensured highest level of care for the husband. I commend her, as a person married only 1 mth, losing her husband to a comatose, completely paralyzed state, and doing so for 7 years and continuing to do so to this day.

Lancecrossfire

Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 01:35 pm Click here to edit this post

Nos---you are slipping. You could have grrrr'ed at me in your 11;49 post instead waiting to add an extra one at 2:32.

Not sure who "she" is that you are referring to (Spam?) My adding the comment about how one feels about what sex is all about having an affect on what the one person would do was to put it in perspective that the issue could have a big bearing on what actions might take place. That issue hadn't been established one way or the other.

Flint, Merlin, Resortgirl and others said an type of answer that would lend itself to someone who thought sex was more than just a physical act. I only pointed that out.

Grrr at me and not anyone else who has the same thoughts? Thanks Nos, I know I can always count on you.

Noslonna

Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 01:39 pm Click here to edit this post

Lance... I just felt like grrring at you. Nothing wrong with little grrr now and then is there?

Spamgirl

Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 01:43 pm Click here to edit this post

Lance - she was grring at Laf... and the "she" was Lalavoom

Mishamisha

Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 01:44 pm Click here to edit this post

LOL, and here I thought Nossie was really grrring at Laf for disagreeing with her cub.

Noslonna

Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 01:48 pm Click here to edit this post

ok ok... I meant to type Laf but Lance just popped on the screen.

Spamgirl

Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 01:54 pm Click here to edit this post

haha nos, you can't lead lance on any longer... but just for you:

GRRRRRR LANCE

Noslonna

Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 02:00 pm Click here to edit this post

Spam are you trying to steal him away?

Lance.. GR GRR GRRR

take THAT spam.