Accepted as it is, I don't want to pry in your personal affairs.In that specific case, a lack of romantic interest. A relationship wouldn't have been desirable or beneficial. You'll have to take my word for that without my having to define the nature of our relationship in detail, those details of which would necessarily not be applicable to any other situation anyway.
Nope, that's not what I said at all, so much so that I said earlier that I would be more inclined to understand a random sexual encounter with a stranger than to understand wanting a sexual encounter with a friend. I accept people saying that they seek sex for sex's sake, even if I personally don't do it. A sexual relationship is just that: a sexual relationship. It doesn't necessarily entail romantic feelings and I never made such an assumption.Like I said, I define it on an individual basis. However, if I wanted to generalize, I'd agree with what you're saying. My only problem is that I find a flaw with your assumption that a romantic partnership is the natural endpoint of any sexual relationship. It may be, but it may not be. It depends on the individuals.
I'm currently in such a situation. It's great! No expectations, no flowers or card, no phone calls just to let them know you're "thinkin' about 'em".
Very efficient and business like. She comes over, I fix a drink, we chat a bit about our day and one of us says "Let's do this!".
And then we do.
So now you're just "friends"?
I find the concept of "f*ck buddies" rather pathetic and shallow to be honest. It's like putting intimacy (and sex) on the same level as Monopoly or Trivial Pursuit.
I find the concept of "f*ck buddies" rather pathetic and shallow to be honest. It's like putting intimacy (and sex) on the same level as Monopoly or Trivial Pursuit.
Unless you're in love with someone, sex is on the same level as Monopoly or Trivial Pursuit.
Actually, I hate Monopoly, so sex is way better than Monopoly.
Unless you're in love with someone, sex is on the same level as Monopoly or Trivial Pursuit.
Actually, I hate Monopoly, so sex is way better than Monopoly.
You're just not building the hotels in the right places.
Unless you're in love with someone, sex is on the same level as Monopoly or Trivial Pursuit.
Actually, I hate Monopoly, so sex is way better than Monopoly.
You're just not building the hotels in the right places.
I was going to make a joke about my roommate's giant vagina here...
Oh, it was some random comment during D&D one night...something about men sleeping with small women to make their dicks look big, and Sarah's character is a half-orc and was sleeping with a small human male, so naturally our DM said it was to make her vagina look bigger. From then on, Sarah's reasoning for everything was "to make my vagina look bigger!" And half of the table talk is how much we can fit in there...
See right there? That's just not right in my book. There's a big difference between:It was a physical expression of the type of love you share with friends.
1. Being friends
2. Being physically attracted to someone
3. Being in love with someone
And while the last two can grant the development of a sexual situation or encounter, as far as I am concerned the first doesn't. To be honest, it would feel like incest.
This said: IDIC, I say.
Well, it's better than Solitaire.I find the concept of "f*ck buddies" rather pathetic and shallow to be honest. It's like putting intimacy (and sex) on the same level as Monopoly or Trivial Pursuit.
"Broadwalk."Broadwalk or Virginia Avenue?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.