Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site mhuxm.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!mhuxm!clairep From: clairep@mhuxm.UUCP (Louise Levy) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: Living Together Without Sex Message-ID: <284@mhuxm.UUCP> Date: Wed, 12-Dec-84 13:04:29 EST Article-I.D.: mhuxm.284 Posted: Wed Dec 12 13:04:29 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 13-Dec-84 02:57:24 EST Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill Lines: 49 This is in reply to Richard Blouin's posting which basically stated that living together without sex as a means to get the non-sexual relating part together is unhealthy, if not downright sick. I would have agreed with Richard in the not so distant past. However, having learned alot more about human relationships in general, my feelings and thoughts have changed. I'll try now to share some of them. I believe, at this point in time, that we, as humans, interact with the world around us through our senses. Touch is the sense that allows us to feel. The grossest aspect of touch is that of physical touching, while the finest aspect of touch is what one feels from one's "heart". It has been my experience that the sexual part of a relationship is so outwardly tantalizing, that it is misconstrued to be the most fulfilling part of a relationship. That can become, I have found, a vicious cycle, i.e. using sex to gain the closeness one desires from a relationship. What I think maybe happening is that I am then keeping myself on that most outward level of relating. Without the sex the relationship can feel "empty". Instead of always turning our feelings into sex, another approach might be to take the feelings we have for another, when we feel we want to make love sexually, and make love nonsexually, i.e. really feeling close to that person. It seems the major task we all have as human beings is to relate to other humans as best we can. The quality of our relationships often marks the eulogies at our funerals. An SO relationship is no different than any other, except that it is deemed to be more fulfilling and that one attains a degree of closeness not found in most other relationships. To define that closeness in terms of sexuality demeans it. To say that one who abstains needs to see a therapist is missing the point of relationships. Believe me, I'm not anti-sex. To be frank, I dig it. But through my "years" of experience with a marriage and single-hood, I have found sex to be a vehicle through which closeness can be expressed. But it is not THE vehicle to create closeness or continue it. This is all a quick pouring out of some things I have been thinking about, acting on, and desiring to write about. It's by no means totally expresses all I have been thinking about. Given another block of free time I'll write more if anyone cares to discuss it.