Size, attraction and sexless marriages

[morelaugh]

IMO, size doesn’t matter only to woman who are not too much into sex. I mean, sex IS mostly in your head and all, but you still need some physical sensation to get things going. I’m not saying there is no way around it, and I probably wouldn’t reject a great guy just for that - but I would need some help (maybe in the form of toys) to achieve orgasm.

 

Women are generally prepared to get in a relationship with the guy regardless of his size and even if they don’t feel attracted to him sexually. Women are told from an early age that it doesn’t matter, sex is not the most important thing in life and they will ‘grow to love their men’ even though they are not attracted to them now. Which is exactly what happens – they LOVE their men, but they are still not sexually attracted to them. Why would anyone want sex if it’s not satisfying? Besides, after all, it’s not important, is it??

 

It’s the same with the men and attractive girls – except, men tend to be more honest and in touch with their own desires, and rarely marry someone they don’t find attractive.

 

Maybe this little theory can even explain conflicts in some sexless marriages:

• She married him for being a great guy. She was never that attracted to him, but hey, sex is not important and they get along well!
  
• He married her because she was gorgeous and sexy, and the best looking girl who would accept him. He is short, skinny and has a small d1ck – but hey, this stuff is not important to women, right?

10 years down the line, she doesn’t want to have sex with him (not important) and he is wondering why. He doesn’t want to be a nice guy anymore and is frustrated and she doesn’t understand what has changed.

 

I recently had a conversation with friends (both males and females) about this.

 

What do you guys think?

 

Does this theory hold any truth?

[Tony T]

I think females have been given a line of BS. Physical and sexual attraction is critical in a relationship, even though it seldom keeps its intensity and it's subject to disappearing without notice. Starting a relationship out without some sort of sexual passion is just plain nuts...it won't work. If it's not there, then it's just a platonic friendship.

 

Women are just plain fooling themselves if they think they can have a relationship with someone to whom they are not physically attracted...and then one day, all of a sudden, they'll want to bang his bones in the elevator. That just doesn't happen.

 

Are women really told this? By whom?

[new_stella]

I think you may be right.

 

It could even have something to do with the biological differences: men can have sex without consequences; women could get stuck with unwanted pregnancies.

Even today, this may affect our way of thinking.

[nylah]

I don't really know about everything else, BUT size does matter to me....

[IpAncA]

I don't know about other women but I have to be attracted to the man physically. There's no way I would have married him if I wasn't attracted to him physically. Sounds cold but hey whatever.

 

Sure sex isn't everything but if I'm not attracted to him, I'm not doing it.

 

Women are just plain fooling themselves if they think they can have a relationship with someone to whom they are not physically attracted...and then one day, all of a sudden, they'll want to bang his bones in the elevator. That just doesn't happen.

 

Hey you want to know something. I was on another forum and this very subject popped up.

 

I was told I was shallow for wanting to be attracted to the guy physically. They told me that there is more to a person then that (coming from women and couple of men). True but I need the physical part as well. Way it goes and sorry if it's shallow but that's the way I am.

 

they will ‘grow to love their men’ even though they are not attracted to them now.

 

Yeah...and what happends if they don't grow to love them? Their SO gets the butt end.

[morelaugh]

Are women really told this? By whom?

I think so.

 

We (my friends and me) spent a few hours talking about it and it looked like everybody agreed that the message sent to the girls (by families, society, media…) was that there are thousands things more important than sex. Almost everything is more important.

 

Off course, we maybe wrong. It could be just my circle.

 

That’s why I’m asking…

[nylah]

I don't know about other women but I have to be attracted to the man physically. There's no way I would have married him if I wasn't attracted to him physically. Sounds cold but hey whatever.

 

Sure sex isn't everything but if I'm not attracted to him, I'm not doing it.

 

 

 

Hey you want to know something. I was on another forum and this very subject popped up.

 

I was told I was shallow for wanting to be attracted to the guy physically. They told me that there is more to a person then that (coming from women and couple of men). True but I need the physical part as well. Way it goes and sorry if it's shallow but that's the way I am.

 

 

 

Yeah...and what happends if they don't grow to love them? Their SO gets the butt end.

 

OH, AND SIZE DOES MATTER:p

[morelaugh]

I don't know about other women but I have to be attracted to the man physically. There's no way I would have married him if I wasn't attracted to him physically. Sounds cold but hey whatever.

 

Sure sex isn't everything but if I'm not attracted to him, I'm not doing it.

 

Hey you want to know something. I was on another forum and this very subject popped up.

 

I was told I was shallow for wanting to be attracted to the guy physically. They told me that there is more to a person then that (coming from women and couple of men). True but I need the physical part as well. Way it goes and sorry if it's shallow but that's the way I am.

 

Yeah...and what happends if they don't grow to love them? Their SO gets the butt end.

Exactly. This is what I'm talking about!

 

Go by that, and it is a recipe for disaster.

[IpAncA]

Go by that, and it is a recipe for disaster.

 

Oh I think it is for a lot of people who go that route.

[norajane]

IMO, size doesn’t matter only to woman who are not too much into sex. I mean, sex IS mostly in your head and all, but you still need some physical sensation to get things going. I’m not saying there is no way around it, and I probably wouldn’t reject a great guy just for that - but I would need some help (maybe in the form of toys) to achieve orgasm.

 

Women are generally prepared to get in a relationship with the guy regardless of his size and even if they don’t feel attracted to him sexually. Women are told from an early age that it doesn’t matter, sex is not the most important thing in life and they will ‘grow to love their men’ even though they are not attracted to them now. Which is exactly what happens – they LOVE their men, but they are still not sexually attracted to them. Why would anyone want sex if it’s not satisfying? Besides, after all, it’s not important, is it??

 

It’s the same with the men and attractive girls – except, men tend to be more honest and in touch with their own desires, and rarely marry someone they don’t find attractive.

 

Maybe this little theory can even explain conflicts in some sexless marriages:

• She married him for being a great guy. She was never that attracted to him, but hey, sex is not important and they get along well!
  
• He married her because she was gorgeous and sexy, and the best looking girl who would accept him. He is short, skinny and has a small d1ck – but hey, this stuff is not important to women, right?

10 years down the line, she doesn’t want to have sex with him (not important) and he is wondering why. He doesn’t want to be a nice guy anymore and is frustrated and she doesn’t understand what has changed.

 

I recently had a conversation with friends (both males and females) about this.

 

What do you guys think?

 

Does this theory hold any truth?

 

I have absolutely no idea what you're going on about. You're linking penis size to whether a woman is really attracted to a man to whether a relationship is based on the right things???

 

Size does matter, but not in the way you think. Too big is painful and pain is not an aphrodisiac (to most people, BDSM aside). A man who is a wonderful lover is a wonderful lover for many reasons having nothing to do with his penis at all, because many womens' orgasms come from their clit, not vagina. Speaking for myself, the size of his penis has nothing to do with orgasms, and has nothing do with whether I am attracted to him as a MAN. A whole man, mind you, a man who knows what a great lover is about. Any man who thinks his penis size makes him attractive or makes him a great lover is wrong and is likely a TERRIBLE lover.

 

Of course attraction matters. What I was always told is that it is not the ONLY thing that matters. And that's very, very true. Anyone that bases their marriage SOLELY on whether they are physically attracted is just asking for disappointment down the road.

 

No one ever told me sex was not important. No, sex is NOT the most important thing in life, but is sure is hella important in a relationship, and that's very different from saying sex doesn't matter. Who are these women who are being told sex is not important? Who is telling them that? And why would they believe it when SEX sells, when SEX is everywhere in movies, TV, internet, when teens these days are having way more sex at 13 than I had at 20, when it's all about SEX everywhere in our society???

 

I have no idea why people end up in sexless marriages except from what I read here, it sure sounds like a lot of people KNEW they had problems in the sex department long BEFORE they got married and they got married anyway. Sorry, but I have no sympathy for that and they obviously got something else from their partner they thought was more important (security, ego boost from being with someone beautiful (even if she's frigid), money, children, fear of being alone, whatever).

 

Finally, there is no theory that explains everything.

[This_Too_Shall_Pass]

MoreLaugh, is the debate solely about size? Or is it about not being attracted to a guy in the first place?

 

It seems to me that you equate size with attraction. That would be funny, because then the woman would first ask the man to drop his pants so she can decide whether or not to be attracted to him.

 

 

Women are generally prepared to get in a relationship with the guy regardless of his size and even if they don’t feel attracted to him sexually. Women are told from an early age that it doesn’t matter, sex is not the most important thing in life and they will ‘grow to love their men’ even though they are not attracted to them now. Which is exactly what happens – they LOVE their men, but they are still not sexually attracted to them. Why would anyone want sex if it’s not satisfying? Besides, after all, it’s not important, is it??

 

Refer to the part I bolded. I think it's the other way round, actually. The attraction comes first, and that's the easy part. It's later that the complexities arise.

 

 

My theory is, if you marry someone, you need to be attracted to the person as a whole. You don't view them with secret distaste for whatever reason.

 

When a woman thinks along the lines of, "Well, he has a very tiny weenie....but I'll marry him anyway, because he's a good catch"; she is NOT marrying him for the right reasons.

 

It really doesn't matter what the guy's size is - it's the woman's mentality regarding the marriage, that is wrong. She's thinking of the marriage as a compromise. She was already half-unhappy when she took that step.

 

 

I agree that generally, women are more attracted to a guy's personality. And men are drawn more towards the woman's looks. But that's only one spoke of the wheel of attraction. Without the other spokes in place, the wheel won't roll properly.

 

When you speak of a woman marrying a man because she liked him on only one level, we're talking about imbalance. The same theory applies to the man.

[IpAncA]

My theory is, if you marry someone, you need to be attracted to the person as a whole. You don't view them with secret distaste for whatever reason.

 

When a woman thinks on the terms of, "Well, he has a very tiny weenie....but I'll marry him anyway, because he's a good catch"; she is NOT marrying him for the right reasons.

 

I agree but I do believe there are those who don't follow that.

[This_Too_Shall_Pass]

I agree but I do believe there are those who don't follow that.

 

Yes, there are so many who don't.

 

And then they whine when they can't put up with it any more after a few years.

[OpenBook]

Women are just plain fooling themselves if they think they can have a relationship with someone to whom they are not physically attracted...and then one day, all of a sudden, they'll want to bang his bones in the elevator. That just doesn't happen.

 

I beg to differ. I've "suddenly" become attracted to men who didn't spark my interest at first. I initially didn't notice them (in that way) because they didn't fit my inner mental image of a physically beautiful man. But it was something in their behavior that suddenly made my knees weak - for example, their calm demeanor in difficult situations.

 

Size does matter, but not in the way you think. Too big is painful and pain is not an aphrodisiac (to most people, BDSM aside).

 

If you really want to get technical about it, size matters (to women) in girth, not length. But who wants to get technical in the middle of a heated moment? Not me.

 

When a woman thinks along the lines of, "Well, he has a very tiny weenie....but I'll marry him anyway, because he's a good catch"; she is NOT marrying him for the right reasons.

 

People have been getting married for thousands of years for reasons that have NOTHING to do with sex. Who are we to say they're wrong?

[morelaugh]

You're linking penis size to whether a woman is really attracted to a man to whether a relationship is based on the right things???

Well, I an linking a penis size (and shape) to the level of attraction a woman has towards a man. Men link shape and size of the woman's breasts to the level of attraction. What is wrong with that? How can you be sexually attracted to a man if you are not attracted to his penis?

 

Too big is painful and pain is not an aphrodisiac (to most people, BDSM aside). A man who is a wonderful lover is a wonderful lover for many reasons having nothing to do with his penis at all, because many womens' orgasms come from their clit, not vagina.

Too long may be too painful, too thick – never heard anyone complained

 

Besides, not ALL women orgasm from their clits – I know I don’t.

Lots of women don’t even know that they can have vaginal orgasm.

 

I have absolutely no idea what you're going on about.

No, I don’t think you do.

I wanted to hear other opinions and, I guess, this is what I’m getting.

Why do you sound angry? Did I offend you in any way?

Besides, if you don’t know what I’m talking about, why would you bother to reply to my post?

 

Any man who thinks his penis size makes him attractive or makes him a great lover is wrong and is likely a TERRIBLE lover.

Well, big penis looks sexy.

A man with the big penis feels confident about it. This is the fact. That doesn’t automatically make him a lousy lover. The same goes for good looking girls – they feel more confident with their looks. Not all of them, of course, but most of them.

 

My point was that people have unrealistic expectations and base their relationships on misconceptions.

And then complain when it doesn' work out.

 

Not that I blame those people - they are only human and make mistakes.

Just thinking about it and trying to explain.

[morelaugh]

Yes, there are so many who don't.

 

And then they whine when they can't put up with it any more after a few years.

This is so true.

[morelaugh]

People have been getting married for thousands of years for reasons that have NOTHING to do with sex. Who are we to say they're wrong?

This is also true!

 

See, this is why I asked this question in the first place.

How do we know what is right?

[This_Too_Shall_Pass]

People have been getting married for thousands of years for reasons that have NOTHING to do with sex. Who are we to say they're wrong?

 

I'm not saying they're wrong. Nor am I saying that the reasons for marriage have only to do with sex.

 

My point is that if the reasons (whatever they are) for marriage are wrong, you'll have to face the consequences.

 

The issue is not size - it could've been the guy's attitude, his money, whatever. The issue is that you don't appreciate the person fully, in the first place.

 

The moment you "force" yourself into marriage and have to consciously ignore something you were not happy about in the first place, that's when problems arise.

[blind_otter]

 

My point was that people have unrealistic expectations and base their relationships on misconceptions.

And then complain when it doesn' work out.

 

Not that I blame those people - they are only human and make mistakes.

Just thinking about it and trying to explain.

 

Don't we all have misconceptions, in the beginning? Who is perfect right from the get go? Life is guess and check. We make promises and commitments for the wrong reasons. We figure out that they ARE the wrong reasons and have to pick up the pieces. Everyone is entitled to a little complaining.

[IpAncA]

Yes, there are so many who don't.

 

And then they whine when they can't put up with it any more after a few years.

Yep. One of these days I'm going to ask someone what did they expect. I mean come on.

[KnowHowLoveFeels]

sex IS mostly in your head and all, but you still need some physical sensation to get things going.

 

This is true. Sex, like love and attraction, is a phenomenon that exists in the head. What stimulates one person sexually may not stimulate another. And the physical sensation almost not important if the attraction is there... in the head.

 

Women are generally prepared to get in a relationship with the guy regardless of his size and even if they don’t feel attracted to him sexually. Women are told from an early age that it doesn’t matter, sex is not the most important thing in life and they will ‘grow to love their men’ even though they are not attracted to them now. Which is exactly what happens – they LOVE their men, but they are still not sexually attracted to them. Why would anyone want sex if it’s not satisfying? Besides, after all, it’s not important, is it??

 

:eek:From what century/culture are you from???? Men and women have mostly married the person they find attractive for the past 50 years.

 

I don't know what sort of experience you've had, but most men are considered average size. (Are you saying that the average size is too small for you?)

 

Physical attraction is paramount to the well being of a marriage. However, how do you become attracted to a pen*s? Conversely, are you simply an attractive c*nt to your man?

 

 

Maybe this little theory can even explain conflicts in some sexless marriages:

• She married him for being a great guy. She was never that attracted to him, but hey, sex is not important and they get along well!
  
• He married her because she was gorgeous and sexy, and the best looking girl who would accept him. He is short, skinny and has a small d1ck – but hey, this stuff is not important to women, right?

10 years down the line, she doesn’t want to have sex with him (not important) and he is wondering why. He doesn’t want to be a nice guy anymore and is frustrated and she doesn’t understand what has changed.

 

I don't know what you mean by "skinny". Most men in America are not skinny or short. And if they are, they tend to marry girls who are even shorter than they are.

 

 

 

What do you guys think?

 

Does this theory hold any truth?

 

Your "theory" doesn't hold up. What woman would marry a man she is not sexually attracted to?? That's very childish thinking, IMO.

[OpenBook]

Your "theory" doesn't hold up. What woman would marry a man she is not sexually attracted to?? That's very childish thinking, IMO.

 

If it weren't for the "childish thinking" of our ancestors, we wouldn't be here today.

[tommyr]

Maybe this little theory can even explain conflicts in some sexless marriages:

• She married him for being a great guy. She was never that attracted to him, but hey, sex is not important and they get along well!
  
• He married her because she was gorgeous and sexy, and the best looking girl who would accept him. He is short, skinny and has a small d1ck – but hey, this stuff is not important to women, right?

10 years down the line, she doesn’t want to have sex with him (not important) and he is wondering why. He doesn’t want to be a nice guy anymore and is frustrated and she doesn’t understand what has changed.

 

This hypothetical married couple you speak of - the gorgeous and sexy gal with the short/skinny/small dick guy - you appear to be saying they should never have married in the first place, so HOW did they ever wind up married? Is it the gal's fault - she faked her sex drive in order to snag a rich husband? Or is it the guy's fault - he ignored his obvious birth defects making him unsuitable for any marriage?

[morelaugh]

This hypothetical married couple you speak of - the gorgeous and sexy gal with the short/skinny/small dick guy - you appear to be saying they should never have married in the first place, so HOW did they ever wind up married? Is it the gal's fault - she faked her sex drive in order to snag a rich husband? Or is it the guy's fault - he ignored his obvious birth defects making him unsuitable for any marriage?

 

First of all, please don't get me wrong, I’m not trying to offend anyone.

 

I don’t know what the right answer is.

 

I find the topic interesting simply because it often happens that people have completely different motivations when they get together – which causes problems later on. I was trying to find some pattern and I’m asking your opinion. If the pattern doesn’t exists –fine.

 

As for the hypothetical couple – their drives to get married in the first place appear mismatched. Or, maybe, this is the nature’s way of making us as diverse as possible – and thus increases the chances of the survival of the species?

[morelaugh]

From what century/culture are you from???? Men and women have mostly married the person they find attractive for the past 50 years.

Really? This is very debatable.

I personally don’t think you are right. People marry for all sorts of reasons, mostly security and the kids.

 

I don't know what sort of experience you've had, but most men are considered average size. (Are you saying that the average size is too small for you?)

Of course most men are considered average size – this is what word ‘average’ means.

My personal taste is not really relevant, but I would prefer slightly above average – definitely not huge.

 

However, how do you become attracted to a pen*s? Conversely, are you simply an attractive c*nt to your man?

I can be attracted to penis (among many other things). What so strange about it? I AM an attractive c*nt to my man and I like it. Mind you, not ONLY an attractive c*nt.

 

I don't know what you mean by "skinny". Most men in America are not skinny or short. And if they are, they tend to marry girls who are even shorter than they are.

 

This was just an example.

Also, this may come as a surprise to you, but there IS world outside America.

 

Your "theory" doesn't hold up.

That is quite possible.

 

What woman would marry a man she is not sexually attracted to??

Depending how you define attraction. I know many women (in America and outside) who are very ‘attracted’ to money, security and social status. Fair enough, I guess, but that sort of attraction doesn’t produce desire to have sex with their husbands.

 

That's very childish thinking, IMO.

Again, quite possible.