# Never Married People Have More Sex!



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

Never married people have more sex, and your parents or grandparents probably had more sex than you're having.

So much for the marriage advantage - is staying single better for a good sex life?



> When looking only at married people, the drop was even sharper — from around 73 times a year in 1990 to around 55 in 2014 — bringing their frequency of sexual activity below that of never-married people. People in that group have sex an average of 59 times a year.


This is surprising: 



> the group having sex most often were those born in the 1930s, while those having the least sex were born in the 1990s.


How do you compare to the averages?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...m_term=.224f8cc97c1a&wpisrc=nl_rainbow&wpmm=1


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

Married but Happy said:


> So much for the marriage advantage - is staying single better for a good sex life?


Maybe, maybe not. But staying single is better for avoiding dead bedroom. You can just leave without lasting repercussions.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

It appears that "not married but living together" results in more sex than "married and living together". Does this mean that the latter should get a divorce and keep living together? >


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

tech-novelist said:


> It appears that "not married but living together" results in more sex than "married and living together". Does this mean that the latter should get a divorce and keep living together? >


No, it's already too late! They've already formed their bad habits, so a mere status change is unlikely to help. Better that they should make a concerted effort to have sex daily, to help prop up the poor performance stats of other married people.


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

I don't think in terms of times per year, so here is the math.

73 is every 5 days, 1.4 times a week or just over 6 times a month.

55 is a little more than once a week or 4.6 times a month.


----------



## happy2gether (Dec 6, 2015)

we have sex 4-5x a week minimum even after 23 years. Of course it has fallen from when we were both teens/20s when we would do it 3-4 times a day. I do know several couples our age that have been together less time and MIGHT do it 2-3x a month. Funny thing is out of those usually BOTH the husband and wife complain they don't do it enough, but they will not communicate that to the other.


----------



## urf (Feb 18, 2017)

I think the quality of sex is more important than the quantity don't you?


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

The modern world provides more alternative entertainment and more distractions. (and more porn), so I'm not surprised that people are having less sex. 

I think people stay in marriages that are somewhat unhappy much longer than they would stay in casual relationships that are unhappy.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

uhtred said:


> The modern world provides more alternative entertainment and more distractions. (and more porn), so I'm not surprised that people are having less sex.
> 
> I think people stay in marriages that are somewhat unhappy much longer than they would stay in casual relationships that are unhappy.


Interestingly, unless I misread that article, it said that people who watch porn have MORE sex than those who don't.

Maybe that just means they have a higher sex drive?


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

urf said:


> I think the quality of sex is more important than the quantity don't you?


No; I'll have to disagree here, strongly. Yes, you're right IF the quantity/frequency is _sufficient_ - whatever that means for you. However, great/quality sex only once or twice a year would not do it for me - it would be grounds for divorce rather than satisfaction. Or perhaps I'm just spoiled - I have sex almost daily, and it's always at least good, and once or twice a week it's positively extraordinary in quality.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

WOW!

Maybe testosterone is dropping and ED is becoming more rampant?

Pretty sad.

We have had sex about 60 times this year and I was sick most of January.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

This is true to a degree. What if the last time you had sex was mind blowing, but was in December, 2015?



urf said:


> I think the quality of sex is more important than the quantity don't you?


----------



## Andy1001 (Jun 29, 2016)

urf said:


> I think the quality of sex is more important than the quantity don't you?


No!


----------



## Young at Heart (Jan 6, 2015)

Married but Happy said:


> No; I'll have to disagree here, strongly. Yes, you're right IF the quantity/frequency is _sufficient_ - whatever that means for you. However, great/quality sex only once or twice a year would not do it for me - it would be grounds for divorce rather than satisfaction. Or perhaps I'm just spoiled - I have sex almost daily, and it's always at least good, and once or twice a week it's positively extraordinary in quality.


Sex in some respects is like a team sporting activity. Sometimes you will seem to have a perfect golf game, long straight fairway shots, followed by impossible putts. Other days you will slice each fairway shot. To use a team sport analogy, some days you will hit lots of home runs and other days you will strike out each time at bat. Sometimes your team mates will get home runs and make spectacular catches when you are having an off day. Sometimes your pitcher will pitch a no-hitter. Once in a while everyone will perform spectacularly. To get really good requires practice, lots and lots of practice. I feel that sex is the same. 

Sometimes sex will be absolutely spectacular when you and your spouse are both totally doing everything right!. Other times, one of you will be doing everything right and the other everything wrong and the result will still be enjoyable, but not so spectacular. Sometimes you will both have an off day together. When that happens you need to be able to laugh about it and not let it get you down.

As they use to say about Babe Ruth, he lead the league in home runs, but he also lead the league in strike outs. As with sex, we tend to only remember the spectacular days.

The point is that "quality" requires two people both performing well. That requires practice and a willingness to try and fail.

Too many people put too much emphasis on each sex act. In my opinion we need to be more playful, exploratory and enjoy each other.


----------



## urf (Feb 18, 2017)

Married but Happy said:


> No; I'll have to disagree here, strongly. Yes, you're right IF the quantity/frequency is _sufficient_ - whatever that means for you. However, great/quality sex only once or twice a year would not do it for me - it would be grounds for divorce rather than satisfaction. Or perhaps I'm just spoiled - I have sex almost daily, and it's always at least good, and once or twice a week it's positively extraordinary in quality.


I see your point. If one is thirsty a drink from a fetid pool is better than none. What do folks without partners or happily willing companions do? Prostitutes? Not the best option to my mind. Masturbation is sex with someone you love (hopefully). It always ends well.

How does a person measure satisfaction. Is it merely an climax. Wow, that even sounds great writing it. Is it just physical? I think that there is a bonding that goes on in the afterglow that makes a couple want to be together and do for each other. When repeated over and over you get a stronger relationship overall.

I too am spoiled. I have had sex with my spouse 10's of thousands of times. It never gets old. I guess i'm not qualified to have an opinion on quantity. I can say that with all that sex, all those orgasms, there are some memorable ones. That is what I mean by quality.

All sex seems to take place within the mind. The fantasy is all. Separating the conscious mind from the fantasy experience is where
we all differ. My wife asks.... where did my mind go just now.


----------



## jb02157 (Apr 16, 2014)

Holdingontoit said:


> Maybe, maybe not. But staying single is better for avoiding dead bedroom. You can just leave without lasting repercussions.


After a bad marriage, just picking up and leaving without lasting repercussions sounds awfully good.


----------



## urf (Feb 18, 2017)

farsidejunky said:


> This is true to a degree. What if the last time you had sex was mind blowing, but was in December, 2015?


Is there fault to be handed out for not having sex? Sometimes it is unavoidable. The time and the place never seem to happen in just the right way. Dp months of no sex between a "loving couple" No way, no how that should ever happen. I exempt sickness and injury. What I have experienced is some perceived slight that has occurred during everyday living together. Either words or actions cause hurt feelings. Rather that dealing with it one or the other will tuck away some resentment and act on it in a negative way. When that moment arrives when a kiss or a word can push the other into that pre-sex zone, the wine has been poured and the atmosphere is set, that negativity shows it's face. We the proceed to do that which is not in our own best self interest. We cause our partner to move from receptive to restive and it's because the other day she said "fill in the blank" or he didn't notice "fill in the blank". It's a lack of awareness of the moment and understanding of our own motivations.


----------



## urf (Feb 18, 2017)

Married but Happy said:


> No; I'll have to disagree here, strongly. Yes, you're right IF the quantity/frequency is _sufficient_ - whatever that means for you. However, great/quality sex only once or twice a year would not do it for me - it would be grounds for divorce rather than satisfaction. Or perhaps I'm just spoiled - I have sex almost daily, and it's always at least good, and once or twice a week it's positively extraordinary in quality.


Your not saying that you have great sex with your partner once or twice a year are you? I get the impression you are just making the argument for quantity. Sorry if I misread that. Easy to do on the net.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

Wow some of you guys are really skewing the numbers for those married people. I would say when I was married it was more close to 30 or at most 40 times a year, at least towards the end. I know that there were plenty of weeks long droughts mixed in along the way, Droughts that would not have ended had I not finally said something about it. Of course I was always the bad guy for even keeping track of such things. Oh well, I would say in the last year I have easily had sex over 120 times. So my odds as a divorced guy have gone up considerably. As some one else suggested. Unmarried people tend NOT to linger in bad relationships, where as once you've made that commitment to marriage, it is often far more difficult to extricate yourself from it.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

tech-novelist said:


> It appears that "not married but living together" results in more sex than "married and living together". Does this mean that the latter should get a divorce and keep living together? >


There would be other factors besides whether or not they were married that would need to be looked at. For example:

How many children did each couple have?

How many years have they been living together and/or married.

The ages of the couples, married and living together.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

uhtred said:


> The modern world provides more alternative entertainment and more distractions. (and more porn), so I'm not surprised that people are having less sex.


This is true. A few decades ago there was a prolonged blackout in NY. The result was a baby boom 9 months later.



uhtred said:


> I think people stay in marriages that are somewhat unhappy much longer than they would stay in casual relationships that are unhappy.


Yep


----------



## TheTruthHurts (Oct 1, 2015)

Didn't read the article but did it specify what was considered sex? Do standalone anything (hj, bj, oral, vibrator) with a partner count? Personally I enjoy variety and I enjoy quantity. If only PIV counted my numbers are low, otherwise much, much higher. Does it really matter? I doubt it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Young at Heart (Jan 6, 2015)

urf said:


> ....I too am spoiled. *I have had sex with my spouse 10's of thousands of times*. It never gets old. I guess i'm not qualified to have an opinion on quantity. I can say that with all that sex, all those orgasms, there are some memorable ones. That is what I mean by quality.....


I think that is a bit of an exaggeration. Lets assume twenty thousand to mean "10's of thousands of times.

Doing the math; 20,000 divided by 730 (or twice a day) yields 27.4 years. That is over twenty seven years of sex with your spouse twice each day. Not saying it can't be done, just that it is unlikely for a sustained length of time that is measured in decades. If you are correct, then you and your wife put Rex & Debbie to shame.

I've been married 45 years and the number of times I have had sex with my wife is far far less, like a few thousand times.

The reason your tens of thousands number jumped out at me, is that about 30 or more years ago a couple (Rex & Debbie) not far from where I live made the local headlines when it was learned that they had started their own "500 club, wanting to get to be a 700 a year club." They worked at having sex 500 times a year and did that for multiple years. Debbie the wife use to speak at church group meetings about how she viewed that frequent sex strengthened their marriage. She would also go out of her way to talk to newly weds about the importance of sex in marriage. They even appeared on some national TV talk shows. They even had a special code word for having sex, so they could talk openly about having sex without others knowing what they were saying. They referred to "having sex" as "going to Tukwila" (since it is a suburb of Seattle).

They got folks locally talking and realizing that having sex 500 times a year took a lot of effort and prioritization and nearly constant focus.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=going%20to%20Tukwila

Living | Lovely Place -- This Happy Couple Really Enjoys Visiting Tukwila | Seattle Times Newspaper

Living | Rex, Debby: Still `Visiting Tukwila' And Liking It A Lot | Seattle Times Newspaper

Enjoy!


----------



## urf (Feb 18, 2017)

Young at Heart said:


> I think that is a bit of an exaggeration. Lets assume twenty thousand to mean "10's of thousands of times.
> 
> Doing the math; 20,000 divided by 730 (or twice a day) yields 27.4 years. That is over twenty seven years of sex with your spouse twice each day. Not saying it can't be done, just that it is unlikely for a sustained length of time that is measured in decades. If you are correct, then you and your wife put Rex & Debbie to shame.
> 
> ...


Okay, an exaggeration. I didn't do the math. I've been married 50 years. It comes out to a whole lot any way you crack it up. Call me a liar but I'm satisfied.

Nice to see that there are others here who have been married a long, long time. I guess we must be doing something right.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Your comment makes sense, and shows how tricky it is t separate cause and effect in social science.






tech-novelist said:


> Interestingly, unless I misread that article, it said that people who watch porn have MORE sex than those who don't.
> 
> Maybe that just means they have a higher sex drive?


----------



## TheTruthHurts (Oct 1, 2015)

urf said:


> Okay, an exaggeration. I didn't do the math. I've been married 50 years. It comes out to a whole lot any way you crack it up. Call me a liar but I'm satisfied.
> 
> 
> 
> Nice to see that there are others here who have been married a long, long time. I guess we must be doing something right.




Married only 29 here plus 6 years exclusive dating prior to that. Time goes pretty quickly 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

Young at Heart said:


> I think that is a bit of an exaggeration. Lets assume twenty thousand to mean "10's of thousands of times.


We have done the math - for us - and in 17 years it's more than 8000 times. Frequency was higher in the early years, of course, and slowing down over time. Not bad for pushing retirement age.


----------



## Young at Heart (Jan 6, 2015)

urf said:


> Okay, an exaggeration. I didn't do the math. *I've been married 50 years.* ......*but I'm satisfied.*
> 
> Nice to see that there are others here who have been married a long, long time. I guess we must be doing something right.


I will bet you are satisfied! :wink2:

Yes, being married has some rewards! Well done!


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

Through close to 21 years (almost 18 married) my 2nd wife (46) and I (45) have shared more than 5000 instances of PIV sex thus far (we started having sex on our third date).

Absent having children, some injuries, illnesses and in the past being separated from one another for weeks through months due to work. That number might have been higher, or who knows it might have even been lower?

With my first wife, who was also my first sexual partner, we shared sex around 300 times in the first year and then maintained that frequency until we legally separated in our fourth year following her infidelity.

She was 16 and I was 17 when we started together (we had sex within hours of meeting at a party), yet that didn't stop us having plenty of sex whenever we could. For example despite the fact she wasn't allowed to have her bedroom door closed when I was over. That didn't stop us going at it in her room with the door open, where she would wear a long skirt and sit on my lap at her desk. Or we would go out to a park or anywhere else and do it indoors or out.

Whereas my middle longer term relationship when I was 23 (we started having sex on our second date), saw me share sex around 200 times before I ended it.

The rest of the in-between time which featured some dating and occasional hook ups for circa 3 years, saw me having sex quite variably. So on limited occasion I would be having sex several times in a week for a week or three, with whoever I was seeing for however long I kept it going.

Otherwise I'd have sex with different women once or twice circa every 3-4 months. I could have had more, yet I sometimes turned women down and didn't always bother putting myself out there.

Based upon my experience of being in three longer term sexual relationships, versus having sex on dates or when hooking up with women at clubs/pubs and parties etc. I figure being in any form of long term sexual relationship, will see me get more sex than not being in a long term relationship.

As to having sex 500 times a year, no thanks (I've also got other things to do).

That said absent the usual caveats regarding physical distance, sickness etc, I cannot imagine staying in any sexual relationship, where the sex is less frequent than 150 times a year.


----------



## Vinnydee (Jan 4, 2016)

I have read that Millennials have less sex because of the ready access to online porn. I can see that from all the internet sex forums out there. Many men are living their sex lives online. Why shower, shave and get all dressed up only to be rejected by every girl you try to meet? Just fire up the old PC and masturbate to porn and you are done with no muss or fuss. >

I was born when there was no internet, cable, or color TV. There were exactly 3 networks in black and white. Married couples on TV slept in separate beds and you could not use words commonly in use today like butt or ass. You could not show a bra on TV even when advertising them. We learned about sex the right way, in the street from ill informed friends.  We did not even have anything to masturbate to or to form a fantasy. All we knew about was vanilla sex which was intercourse. Oral sex on woman was considered gay by many and who knew that there was more than just the missionary position.

Despite this, we had a lot of sex. We had no choice but to go out and find women to have sex with us. We did not have a lot of options for fun, and sex is free. I am married 44 years and 30 of those years was lived sharing my wife's girlfriend who lived with us. To say that I had a lot of threesomes over that time period is an understatement. We had group sex and/or threesomes with most of our friends. We got married at the end of the hippie years where there was free love which meant a lot of sex with stoned people. That just carried through in my life. I knew I was poly since I was 11 and had two girlfriends. 

We had to make up our own fantasies unlike the ready made ones you can find all over the internet almost word for word on each site. If we wanted sex we had to actually go out and meet girls 3 nights a week. For my group of friends, both male and female, looking for a boyfriend/girlfriend was the weekend activity. STD's were pretty much limited to prostitutes back then and the birth control pill gave woman a new freedom to have casual sex just like the boys did. 

As far as I knew, there was a lot of sex going in my day, at least among people that I would be drawn to as friends. I now live in a retirement community that was written about all over the world due to the amount of sex going on here. We have swinger clubs, key clubs (wife swapping), meat markets where women fight over men since they outnumber then 10 to 1. Women would go to a car, have sex with a guy, return to the bar and do the same with other guys. When you know that the end is near or you have a fatal disease, you tend to want to experience as much as possible. People get arrested for public sex ever few months. The only old people not having sex are those that cannot medically do so. My wife and I have sex twice a week on average and are still into fetish play in our mid sixties.

With all the forms of entertainment available these days vying for your free time, it affects the amount of time you devote to sex. For us, sex was our main form of entertainment and on a fixed income, is still the cheapest way to have fun. Perhaps some younger people will let us know how it is with them. Of course my opinion is very subjective since I lived in an ethical non monogamous marriage and tended to have friends who also did not have traditional marriages. Sex was a big deal for my generation even though it was not talked about like it is today with forums in which you can share experiences anonymously.


----------



## Mollymolz (Jan 12, 2017)

urf said:


> I think the quality of sex is more important than the quantity don't you?


That depends. Quality is definitely a high ranking factor, but if the quantity is twice a year then that's a problem 

Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

urf said:


> I think the quality of sex is more important than the quantity don't you?


I can't see the point of sacrificing one for the other.

If one doesn't settle for less, it is certainly possible to have both at the same time.


----------



## arbitrator (Feb 13, 2012)

Married but Happy said:


> Never married people have more sex, and your parents or grandparents probably had more sex than you're having.
> 
> So much for the marriage advantage - is staying single better for a good sex life?
> 
> ...


*Not that there's anything necessarily wrong with it, but I would highly suspect that single folks also tend to masturbate a hell of a lot more than their married counterparts do!*


----------



## *Deidre* (Feb 7, 2016)

lol I heard this today on the news. My fiance and I have an awesome sex life, it better not die after the wedding!! >.<


----------



## urf (Feb 18, 2017)

Personal said:


> I can't see the point of sacrificing one for the other.
> 
> If one doesn't settle for less, it is certainly possible to have both at the same time.


I agree but how can you measure quality?


----------



## urf (Feb 18, 2017)

Mollymolz said:


> That depends. Quality is definitely a high ranking factor, but if the quantity is twice a year then that's a problem
> 
> Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk


Not to argue but how does this sentence strike you. I had sex 300 times this year, once it was really, really good.

To paraphrase Woody Allen: Even a bad orgasm is still pretty good.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Married but Happy said:


> Never married people have more sex, and your parents or grandparents probably had more sex than you're having.
> 
> So much for the marriage advantage - is staying single better for a good sex life?
> 
> ...


Not surprising in the least, TBH.

The sheer number of distractions in today's day and age is incalculable. You're all on one of them now, reading this.

I'm in that sweet-spot age where I grew up, and vividly remember, a simpler life, yet have also spent half of it in this age of distraction.

25 years ago, I had 30 or so channels on my TV. Now there's 1000, and I can watch whatever I want, whenever I want.

There was no internet. No smart phones. Connectivity meant talking to people. Socialization meant having people over, or actually going out - and not being distracted by Instagram while you were with them.

People are having less sex for exactly two reasons - One, there are so many distractions these days, and two we're not nearly as _personally_ connected as we once were.

Furthermore, the generation that's grown up with all of this - the children of the 90's and beyond - don't require any real effort to do anything. Everything is right there, on demand, instant. My 16 year old thinks he's being social when he's playing online computer games and chatting over a head set. He genuinely believes that's socialization.

Everything is easy and relatively effortless these days. Many things pose little challenge any more. Hell, you want to have sex? Go on craigslist or any number of similar websites, and you could have a willing partner in an hour. You no longer have to get dressed up and go out on the town and hope to meet somebody - actually make an effort to get laid.

You want a husband or wife? Post an ad!

And the easier things become, the less interesting they are in the long run.

The less time and effort one makes and invests in something, including relationships, the less meaningful it is, and the more we take it for granted. Relationship not going well? I can be going on dates by this evening. No need to fix the current one, it's disposable.

And for this current generation, sex is disposable as well. It means less, because it's so easy to come by, and so common.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

urf said:


> I agree but how can you measure quality?


By ones own subjective impressions.

I find many varied and subjectively great experiences with a number of different sexual partners, has helped to further inform my subjective impressions.

That said I don't think one needs to have had experience with multiple partners, in order to be able to determine the quality of their sexual activities.


----------



## urf (Feb 18, 2017)

Personal said:


> By ones own subjective impressions.
> 
> I find many varied and subjectively great experiences with a number of different sexual partners, has helped to further inform my subjective impressions.
> 
> That said I don't think one needs to have had experience with multiple partners, in order to be able to determine the quality of their sexual activities.


Yes, of course, it is subjective. Kind of like the Supreme Court justice that said of Porn, I know it when I see it.


----------



## Mollymolz (Jan 12, 2017)

urf said:


> I agree but how can you measure quality?


Both partners having an orgasm. If a couple has sex 300 times in a year and only the man has an orgasm the sex can't be that great for the woman. 

Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk


----------



## TX-SC (Aug 25, 2015)

My wife is LD so our sex is usually only a couple of times per month. That's on the low side for sure. 

However, the reality is that sex, although important, is not the most important part of our marriage. She and I work so well together and we have a wonderful marriage with two beautiful daughters. 

I realize this is the sex in marriage forum and as such the sex takes precedence here, but I don't see why anyone would place sex at the top of the list in why to get married? 

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Necessary but not sufficient. 

I'd actually prefer sex with an enthusiastic partner where I didn't O, from simply having intercourse with a dead fish until I finished. The great majority of men and manyh women can give themselves an O any time they want if that is all that they want. 



Mollymolz said:


> Both partners having an orgasm. If a couple has sex 300 times in a year and only the man has an orgasm the sex can't be that great for the woman.
> 
> Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

TX-SC said:


> My wife is LD so our sex is usually only a couple of times per month. That's on the low side for sure.
> 
> However, the reality is that sex, although important, is not the most important part of our marriage. She and I work so well together and we have a wonderful marriage with two beautiful daughters.
> 
> ...


Indeed, to the bolded. If anything, the chance that sex will be less in marriage than if you remain single - and that once married, your options reduce to one and only one person: your spouse - then marriage isn't attractive at all. Sure, there are other considerations, but you don't HAVE to marry to have them. You will still probably be exclusive, but you can give notice that you are unilaterally changing that agreement if the sex is not adequate.


----------



## Mollymolz (Jan 12, 2017)

uhtred said:


> Necessary but not sufficient.
> 
> I'd actually prefer sex with an enthusiastic partner where I didn't O, from simply having intercourse with a dead fish until I finished. The great majority of men and manyh women can give themselves an O any time they want if that is all that they want.


That is still quality though! 

Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk


----------



## TX-SC (Aug 25, 2015)

Married but Happy said:


> Indeed, to the bolded. If anything, the chance that sex will be less in marriage than if you remain single - and that once married, your options reduce to one and only one person: your spouse - then marriage isn't attractive at all. Sure, there are other considerations, but you don't HAVE to marry to have them. You will still probably be exclusive, but you can give notice that you are unilaterally changing that agreement if the sex is not adequate.


I can only speak for me. When I was young, my goal was to one day be married. I was engaged to a woman who cheated on me not too long before the wedding. I broke up with her and called off the wedding. About a year later I met my wife and we eventually got married. 23 years after meeting her, I am still so very in love and so is she. For me, I always dreamed of having a wonderful wife to love me as I do her. I have that. 

For someone who doesn't want kids or someone who doesn't have the ability to commit through better AND worse, you are right. It's best not to get married. If you are the type person who will abandon your partner if and when sex slows down, or if you are just bored with being with one partner, tthen marriage is not for you. 

I was never a player nor found it extremely easy to hook up. My wife was only number 20 for me. So, I can't say I've sampled everything there is to sample. But, I can say that the woman I am married to makes me VERY happy. She is there for me when I need her and I am there for her when she needs me. We are bound in marriage and neither is going to call it quits just because we go through a dry spell for a while. 

I'll simply state again that if I could travel back in time I would marry her again. She is the love of my life. 

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

arbitrator said:


> *Not that there's anything necessarily wrong with it, but I would highly suspect that single folks also tend to masturbate a hell of a lot more than their married counterparts do!*


Not always true. Been married 24 years. PIV maybe 200 times. Masturbated at least 8,500 times. Those of us in sexless or near sexless marriages tend to masturbate ALOT because we get in bed every night with a spouse who won't have sex with us. going to bed alone is easier and less likely to trigger the urge to masturbate.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

TX-SC said:


> For someone who doesn't want kids or someone who doesn't have the ability to commit through better AND worse, you are right. It's best not to get married. If you are the type person who will abandon your partner if and when sex slows down, or if you are just bored with being with one partner, tthen marriage is not for you.


I'm able to commit with or without marriage. I will point out, though, that many people divorce if the sex slows down, or they're bored, etc. - marriage guarantees nothing; if a person can't commit, marriage won't change that.

As for me, I also have a great (_second_) marriage, and it would be the same if we hadn't married (we decided to marry purely for the pragmatic benefits, as marriage would make - and has made - no difference to our love or commitment). I wish I hadn't married the first time, though!


----------



## Young at Heart (Jan 6, 2015)

TX-SC said:


> My wife is LD so our sex is usually only a couple of times per month. That's on the low side for sure.
> 
> However, the reality is that sex, *although important, is not the most important part of our marriage. She and I work so well together and we have a wonderful marriage with two beautiful daughters.*
> 
> ...


I think that I understand what you are saying, but also think you are wrong. I felt as you did until the frequency of sex dropped to nothing and it became a way that my wife emotionally hurt me, actually that we hurt each other. At that point, because of all the things you say, I fought to save and rebuild my Sex Starved Marriage. Yes, there are lots of important qualities in a marriage that can sustain it. However, when both sex and intimacy no longer occur the marriage is in crisis and slowly dying, in my opinion.


----------



## TX-SC (Aug 25, 2015)

Young at Heart said:


> I think that I understand what you are saying, but also think you are wrong. I felt as you did until the frequency of sex dropped to nothing and it became a way that my wife emotionally hurt me, actually that we hurt each other. At that point, because of all the things you say, I fought to save and rebuild my Sex Starved Marriage. Yes, there are lots of important qualities in a marriage that can sustain it. However, when both sex and intimacy no longer occur the marriage is in crisis and slowly dying, in my opinion.


Well, of course! If thete is no intimacy or affection, it's almost impossible to maintain a relationship. That wasn't exactly my point. I'm simply sayong that sex is not the most important aspect of a relationship and should be weighed against other aspects as well. Yes, sex and intimacy are very important. Without it, the love you share will die. 

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

Mollymolz said:


> Both partners having an orgasm. If a couple has sex 300 times in a year and only the man has an orgasm the sex can't be that great for the woman.


Both partners having an orgasm almost all of the time through to all of the time is the minimum standard. I presume "quality" in this context requires something more than just sharing mutual orgasms.

Absent orgasms for one or all who are sharing that sex, I can't see why one or all would want to keep sharing that sex often or at all.


----------



## Steve1000 (Nov 25, 2013)

tech-novelist said:


> It appears that "not married but living together" results in more sex than "married and living together". Does this mean that the latter should get a divorce and keep living together? >


Brilliant Idea!


----------



## Steve1000 (Nov 25, 2013)

*Deidre* said:


> lol I heard this today on the news. My fiance and I have an awesome sex life, it better not die after the wedding!! >.<


Just don't eat wedding cake! I've heard too many stories of loss of interested in sex after eating wedding cake. :surprise:


----------



## *Deidre* (Feb 7, 2016)

Steve1000 said:


> Just don't eat wedding cake! I've heard too many stories of loss of interested in sex after eating wedding cake. :surprise:


lol

You know what I have read that could be part wedding folklore and part truth? That couples who shoved wedding cake into their spouses' faces during the cutting of the cake at their wedding, had the highest divorce rate lol!! :surprise:


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

*Deidre* said:


> lol
> 
> You know what I have read that could be part wedding folklore and part truth? That couples who shoved wedding cake into their spouses' faces during the cutting of the cake at their wedding, had the highest divorce rate lol!! :surprise:


Wouldn't surprise me, could be a correlation between that act and how much they respect each other.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

I think a more universal truth would be ," those who prioritize sex will have more sex". I had just as much, if not more, sex married than I had single. Mostly due to access for sure. But married or single sex has always been a non negotiable priority so I have never been sexless in any relationship


----------



## Finwe (Nov 5, 2015)

urf said:


> I think the quality of sex is more important than the quantity don't you?


Both...I view as an optimization between two variables, simple calculus really......which explain a few issues in my life:wink2:


----------

