Search Results: sexless marriage

I have been told that it's possible to make someone happy even without having sex with them. But can you make them TRULY happy if the only thing they actually want from you beyond your affection and attention, is sex?

Exact quote from the person: """You can love someone and make someone happy without sex. This need for sex to have a relationship or that guys can't be happy unless they are laid thought is just one way of controlling and guilt tripping girls into giving away parts of themselves to scum bag guys who leave them and use them."""

I personally think if sex is what you want and it is also what you don't get whatsoever, then you won't feel happy, in fact, you'll feel miserable and eventually break up and just find someone else who actually gives you what you desire.

But others think this is "just guilt tripping" because "sex is not important", and "if they love you then clearly they can WAIT (for a year, or more, or until they buy a pair of rings and sign some papers) because that's how they show that they ACTUALLY care about me".

What do you think? Is it possible to make your partner happy if they want to have sex with you and you don't want to have sex with them ever, with a sexless marriage for example, while expecting them to "stay faithful" and "not cheat" with someone who's actually willing to show physical intimacy?

I've been thinking lately about the kinds of social stigmas that plague men and women.

With women, there's the social stigma of the "slut." It's generally not a positive or socially encouraged status among a woman's peers, and generally not something a woman is "proud" about or actively flaunts to her female friends. Ironically, it's actually a positive status for men. In a world full of sexually repressed and inhibited women, and women with a low sex drive and libido, a "slut" is a breath of fresh air and a sign of relief to calm down a guy's anxieties about living the rest of his sexual life in a sexless or sexually miserable marriage.

Ironically, with men, it's the complete opposite it seems. The term "player" is initially not even seen as a sort of social stigma among guys. It's something that guys in high school mostly aspire to be, and something they feel "proud" about boasting and flaunting publicly for the world to see, especially their male friends. Yet, it's actually a negative status for women. Women want a man who is not uncontrollably sexually hungry for any female that walks, but loyal and committed to just her. Women also fear being used and then discarded or abandoned by a man they develop an emotional connection with, and don't want to be hurt. So, the "player" status isn't exactly conducive to helping relax and calm down those fears and anxieties regarding a relationship with a man.

At least that's how it was when I was in high school over a decade ago.

I'm just curious how things are now for guys in high school.