Quote:
Originally Posted by jammies
In this case, one of the the underlying premises is that sex is something that gets better when you don't do it for 3 months, when in truth, it gets better with practice, just like everything else. Do you end up being a better hockey player by not playing hockey for 3 months? Are you smarter by not studying for 3 months? A better chef by not cooking for 3 months? By this "theory", your peak sexual performance is at virginity's loss, and it's all downhill from there.
|
If you get better the more you do it, why do some couples who have been together for a long period of time say their sex life is stagnant?
Also, I'm not sure they're saying the sex will get better at all. Rather, it'll mean more and be more special. In addition, they're not doing it to improve their sex life, rather their connection.
Quote:
The other premise is that abstaining from sex proves your commitment to your partner. No, not having sex with *other people* proves your commitment - not having sex with your partner just adds them to that list of people with whom you are not having sex. Abstention proves something about your willpower, but it has NOTHING to do with commitment. There's women I've slept with but feel no commitment towards, and there are women I've not slept with but would never betray. The concepts have nothing to do with one another.
Now back to the much more entertaining thread derailment.
|
Again, I don't think it's about proving commitment, rather deepening the bond. Which CAN happen in a non-sexual way.
I love playing devil's advocate. (Or in this case would I be playing the opposite role as it seems the devil's advocate would be for sex, no?)