Would you choose....

-A girl who was truly in love with you; you were her one-and-only, you were made for each other, etc., BUT you didn't sexually excite her at all.

O...

-A girl who was practically your whore, your love slave, who slavered and lusted after you and wanted you so bad, nonstop, and fucked you crazy, BUT she wasn't at all in love with you.

The choice might seem obvious, at first, but after having been in both situations, I sometimes wonder if I prefer a true love even if it can't be physical or if I want the simplicity of unbridled sexual passion without any emotional complication.

-Infrared

Yes, I know it's been done before. Shut up.

Neither, Id stay single.

But I do have a penchant for the first selection, I'd take love and hopefully brains over love slave that cant keep her legs closed, and is on par with the litterbox when it comes to IQ.

A woman cannot be in love with a man that doesn't sexually excite her. So the first scenario is an impossibility. Kinda makes the whole question pointless.

*shuts up*

There are no stupid questions...only stupid people who ask questions.

I would take either and work on turning them into the other. The only constant is change.

As above but ive neverbeen with a girl who isnt interested in sex, well atleast eventually.

Its up to you to make it romantic and any girl will crumble.

Love is great, so is sex.

If i was in a relationship were the girl loved me truly, but couldnt have sex with me ever,i would sleep with other girls, probably break up with her, unless she let me.



[This message has been edited by luckyphill (edited 03-24-2004).]

quote:Originally posted by Easy Going:

There are no stupid questions...only stupid people who ask questions.

I would take either and work on turning them into the other. The only constant is change.

Cindy: Yes, I know. (Before you say it: The situation I was in was with a girl who loved me very much/told me she was in love with me, but when we started dabbling in sex, somehow decided I didn't do it for her at all. Thus, it ended.)

Easy: And when did you start thinking I'm stupid? Seems a lot of people do, lately. Oh well.

correct me if I am wrong infrared, but I took the first option to mean someone who had a passive attitude towards sex with you, but you all still did it. the sex life did not make the relationship, you both had better, but you still had a sex life. if you are talking friend zone, I would take the slave.

i dont think you are stupid...it is just something i say when someone says "stupid question"



[This message has been edited by Easy Going (edited 03-24-2004).]

yes, it is very possible to be deeply in love with someone, and not be sexually attracted to that person. sex is NOT everything. friendship is the most important part of a relationship. what about those people out there that have been married for years and due to an accident or something, one of them is rendered incapable of performing?