The debate "Partner should satisfy the other even if no longer wants sex." was started by
March 2, 2016, 2:36 pm.
16 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 21 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
NerdTagz posted 8 arguments, R_o_h_i_t posted 3 arguments to the agreers part.
Voidiq posted 1 argument, RyanWakefield posted 1 argument, PsychDave posted 1 argument, Freyja posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
NerdTagz, R_o_h_i_t, KrazeTheCricket, fadi, Sosocratese, lawyerlady, BlueMouse and 9 visitors agree.
RyanWakefield, Voidiq, PsychDave, sickboyblonde, Freyja, logicxreason, Burnin, jen, supercat and 12 visitors disagree.
my bets are that's why a lot of marriages fail as well
If you feel that doesn't happen then I dont know what to tell you. what's wrong with catering to each other.
If that's what you really think then okay. If you feel that way fine but the majority of men in marriages who still have a sex drive and a wife who's not up to it end up cheating anyway and making a horrible marriage for both parties.
I completely agree.
If you want a lasting relationship, expecting your partner to service you is not the way to do it. If you can't imagine having a stable relationship without your partner catering to your sexual desires, they aren't the problem.
Its all up to the person and if they want a lasting relationships.
Has nobody on this app heard of masturbation?
well some situations are understable but what do you expect a partner to do if he has a high sex drive and you no longer desire sex. I see some form of cheating coming your way
The understanding should be very high in that case
If one partner just isn't in the mood and doesn't want to participate in any way then they shouldn't have to. If the other one really needs that relief then they can do it themselves.
Sorry I meant compromises
I agree that one should consider the other person's feelings and desires. But that consideration is a two way Street. If that person doesn't want to perform sexual acts it's their choice. They can't be forced into it.
Maybe the partner still interested in intercourse can find ways to entice the other partner by trying to arouse them. But to EXPECT someone to do sexual favours for you as a duty is just wrong. Comprises are required from both parties.
How many of those commenting are actually married or in a stable relationship?
No one is ever obligated to have sex. Whether married, dating, or otherwise. If one partner is not in the mood, they absolutely should not have to have sex. If they choose to, that's fine, but you and I have no right to tell them they should.
Love isn't a feeling its an action. You can care all you want but if you don't act on that love and show that you care. What's the point? That's why relationships fail because partners fail to show that they care and get lazy once they get really comfortable in the relationship.
If one need a healthy relationship then one should definitely be able to satisfy his or her partner
I may be being naive, but surely love isn't purely about sex
Reasons why cheating happens. If you have no interest in helping out your partner or pleasing them not sure what to say. Just go for people with low sexual needs but sometimes it happens and I don't see how its an issue to want to help them even though you no longer want sex.
That would turn a partner into a sex slave, basically.
That's mutual understanding
Nobody in a relationship is obligated to perform sexual favours if they don't want to.
It's another thing of they aren't personally aroused but don't mind arousing their partner but that's only if they WANT to. Not because it's some kind of duty.
Why not satisfy your partner even if you no longer want sex?