Tell me, what's worse? Question for people about relationships.

[Ophelia]

Let's say all things being equal, both partners are smart, attractive, progressive, reasonably nice people which you have children with already.

1. You're married to a person who's totally in love with you, but for some reason, emotionally or physically, you either don't have sex or perhaps do rarely. She's (or he's) tried to work on it, but it just isn't there.

Or

2. You are married to a person who's a wild (wo)man in the sack, but will never love you as much as you love her (or him). (S)he can be faithful and content with you, and is capable of such feelings, but can't quite feel it as much as you do in return.

I know most would say neither, but I'm still curious.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

1. It seems to me - given your criteria that Id have to go with 2 because

You said I love her, even though she loves me less. Option 1 didn't say I love her, only that she loves me which is a nice feeling but if I don't love her why stay?

[VelmaD]

2. You know...

this situation could also be reversed. Why not open it up to everybody? Not just asking men about women.

[Ophelia]

4. True true

will edit

[andino]

3. Hmmmmmmmmm

I'd have to say #2.


At least I'd have great sex until the divorce. ;)

[Hav]

5. .

I, as a guy, would prefer possibility number 1.
If I looked into her eyes, I would want to know that she loves me as much as I do love her.
I never regarded sex as very important though.

6. being realistic

I'd go with 2 because the way you've phrased the question, there is more connection in the second option.

& because, from my experience, in a couple there is always one person who loves the other more -- even if an infinitesimal amount more.

The question is really phrased though in a way that creates the answer. If someone is totally in love with you but emotionally rarely wants to have sex with you (assuming you want to have sex with them) then you're talking about a specific type of non-passionate love, which makes me wonder if that would be defined as totally in love? At least as regards a relationship between a husband and wife. Sounds like agape as opposed to eros. But in a relationship between husband and wife wouldn't totally in love mean both agape and eros?

just a quibble!

[MissMillie]

7. Two is worse (n/t)

.

[LynzM]

8. Hrm....

I'd say that two is worse. Sex is nice but not a deal-breaker to me. I'd rather know how much I'm loved than know that someone is turned on by me, ya know?

[geniph]

9. There's things you can do to improve your sex life,

but you can't make someone love you. #2 would kill me. #1 can be worked on.

[dawg]

10. I'll take number 1 all the way.

I want to be special, not just great in bed.:evilgrin:

I'm kind of afraid that I'm living number 2. That's probably not entirely fair for me to say, but I have that feeling sometimes.

I think women, in general, take the men in their lives for granted. Unless, of course, we're assholes - then they'll follow us anywhere.