Hypothetically say you're in a relationship and you really truly love the other person more than anything. Say something happened to you and you weren't able to please that person anymore sexually but because you loved each other, your mate wouldn't want to stop being with you. Would you be willing to let another person sexually please your mate out of love? As long as you didn't have to deal with that other person directly?
2007-09-28 07:24:15 · 30 answers · asked by Kitten 4 in Family & Relationships ➔ Marriage & Divorce
If you were unable to please your mate anymore because of some physical disability, would you be willing to let someone else do it for you?
2007-09-28 07:25:24 · update #1
Right after the divorce was final!
2007-09-28 07:27:18 · answer #1 · answered by ranch_tester 5 · 7⤊ 3⤋
Great question! This is not really a controversial question. I'd say it's more a moral dilemma.
I would also say it's absolutely not okay. When you talk of love, it should be loving the person for who they are and including all their faults and deficiencies. Only loving 90% or 75% of the person shouldn't even be possible (although some people try to think in those terms). Love should not be qualified by situations. Given your hypothetical situation, what happens when this other person who's there only to please your mate also happens to have a nice personality? How long do you think it will it be before you're hypothetically replaced? You're on the right track though even if this is just a hypothetical situation. It's definitely a great discussion with your mate because it gives you two something to think about--what it really means to say you love someone.
Also, try substituting other parts of a relationship and see if your question remains as controversial. Say you have a great relationship in bed but in terms of personality your mate is a bore. Does that mean you should be free to look elsewhere for just the personality and emotional stimulation (as long as you don't sleep with this second individual since that's your mate's primary role)? No, of course not. That would be called an emotional affair and just like your original hypothetical situation is still a form of cheating.
Good luck.
2007-09-28 07:30:29 · answer #2 · answered by Sin™ 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
That is a hard question. Knowing a little more about your situation would help. Are you paralized? Are you in pain? Do you have a STD? What exactly is the problem? There are numerous ways to achieve sexual release with a partner rather than intercourse. Knowing what we are working with would help here. If his interest has wanned because of something, then giving him your okay to cheat is not the answer. We need more details.
2007-09-28 07:55:10 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Thats a tough one. I guess it depends on the disability. If things were missing (organs) and it was impossible then i guess so. Love is powerful and strong, but passion has a way of growing and can be strong enough to sway. Now if you are in a deep and loving relationship , it would be almost as if you were just swapping, no ties and no regrets. How does the person feel who dosent get to give sex? does that person feel the need for some kind of release? That might tear the person apart want, because they dont get to give to the one they love and in turn never get their own release. Touchy but it should be ok.
2007-09-28 07:35:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
That is a very interesting question. The truth is that there are so many more ways to please a person than standard intercourse. Orally or with hands, toys is an answer. However, if they were going to be miserable without real contact, and they still loved me but needed to be fulfilled and I could not I would probably let it happen.
2007-09-28 07:47:20 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Okay, lets say for instance my penis gets cut off in some horrible lawn mowing accident. It was mulched and they couldn't sew it back on. Yes, if my wife loved me and said that she needed the sexual touch of a man just for sex and not for love I would allow it to happen. It would be frustrating for me since my unfortunate and accidental sex change, but I would allow it. At least then I could allow my inner lesbian to shine through though. I know there are a lot of jokes in there but the core message remains.
2007-09-28 07:58:40 · answer #6 · answered by No one 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yeah, sexual desire is a part of anyone's life, and if you can't do it you shouldn't expect your mate to lose interest somehow. It'd be like asking someone to stop being hungry when they don't eat. I think the "do what you have to, but keep it out of my life" approach you discuss is best, but I also think the mate's other sexual partner(s) would need to know the whole story, just so no one is caught off guard or tries anything they shouldn't.
2007-09-28 07:42:54 · answer #7 · answered by Terry M 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I would like to think that I could...but come on....if I were to unfortunately be faced with that reality...I can't predict with 100% aassurance that I would be willing to let another woman take care of my husband's physical needs.
2007-09-28 07:29:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
No, because that is not a monogamous relationship any longer. If say for example, my husband became wheel chair bound.... I wouldn't go off to be "pleased" by someone else just because he couldn't have intercourse physically. There are other ways to be "pleased" and it would be a new obstacle in our lives, but we'd find a way to fix it TOGETHER.
2007-09-28 07:30:15 · answer #9 · answered by outlandsishlady 3 · 4⤊ 3⤋
No, and if your mate really loved you then they wouldn't want such a thing either. Mas ter ba tion, it's what's after dinner.
The only way you can't participate at all is if your completely paralized. Intercourse is not the only form of sex, or intimacy. Use your brain, it's the biggest sex organ we have.
2007-09-28 07:29:47 · answer #10 · answered by L H 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Yes, given that horrible hypothetical scenario I would recognize that she has needs that continue though my ability to meet them does not...but I object to the characterization that he "is doing it for me". That's a very thought-provoking yet thoroughly depressing question; nice job,thank you. Now go away.
2007-09-28 07:31:58 · answer #11 · answered by Captain S 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋