FrancisZ said:
Not to insult you: I can understand that perhaps, personally, you would feel that you are demonstrating a great propensity for deep feelings by hanging around afterward. However: how much more close can two people literally be, than when one is physically attached to the other?
If you are talking about spatial distance, you are right. However, when talking about psychological distance, how close do you think two ppl who dated several times and decided to have sex can be ? Besides it's role for reproduction, sex is just another tool for closing the distance, not the ultimate "reward" of a close interpersonal social relation. A tool, yeah. It can build the interpersonal relation, like many other things do.
If you advocating refraining from sex until you are convinced that you "love" that person, Id say that while your advice looks good on paper, it's terrible and unpractical in the day to day life.
FrancisZ said:
I would dare to say, that sexual intercourse requires at least as much trust between partners as dancing.
I agree. But humans routinely dance with ppl they barely know at the parties, they swing dance partners, they have fun. They do the same in clubs. In a word, the level of trust needed to dance with someone is extremely low.
FrancisZ said:
It is being indifferent, and I don't think that indifference is respectful.
Indifference is not disrespectful either. But it's not even a case of indifference, in some cases is just playing the game as it unfolds.
FrancisZ said:
I simply do not agree that the kind of relationship advice you're propagating is ideal. Is it feasible? Yes.
You may not agree with it, but its the status quo in many parts of this world. "Serial monogamy", a string of relations with different degrees of success.
FrancisZ said:
You can bed down anyone you want; but don't be surprised when someone you initially thought was indifferent, turns out not to be.
Actually you can't bed anyone you want :P Youll fail miserably a lot of time and youll be rejected. Women are not so weak and naive as you seem to believe they are, because you put all the burden of decisions on man. (i.e refrain from sex until whatever) They are very well equipped to deal with man and their advances, and perfectly capable to
take decisions about their sexual lives.
FrancisZ said:
I'll be honest with you: the woman that I loved, I truly wanted at any moment that I was beside her. And when I wasn't with her, I dreamed of her even. A sort of wish fulfillment, I suppose.
It is not the desire (as good or evil) that is in question; it is how you deal with it. My wife, had I married her, I would never dare lay a hand upon, unless I thought it comforted her too--that it showed her how much I cared. And that is even despite how much I wanted her always.
You use a strange expression. "My wife, had I married her". How can she be your wife if you wasnt married ? I realize this is a personal question, so please do not feel compelled to answer, it is your call.
FrancisZ said:
It is supposed to be saying "I love you" to someone. "I love you, and I want to be comfort to you this much." And if a husband does not mean that also, when he asks this of his wife (to be that close), then he is being selfish.
Its not supposed to say that Francis. As I said, the status quo is to have sex way before you have a meaningful interpersonal relation, way before you know that person, way before you love her/him.
What, it takes several dates to have sex, how can anyone expect sex to be an act of love ?
FrancisZ said:
It is a common occurrence, truly; but infatuation is not mature love.
Its not supposed to be :P
FrancisZ said:
Totally different. You have absolutely no control over space rocks of any persuasions.
No, bot both events are unlikely to take place in the life of a person :P Thats the point. Worry less about things which didn't happened yet. Paralysis by analysis. When **** hits the fan, anyway, you'll find yourself pretty much unprepared despite the fact that you dwelled so much on such choices.
FrancisZ said:
Of course, you also have free will.
Free will ... yes you do. You are also a slave of biology, a slave of social forces, a slave of situation.