make_your_move: (Default)
make_your_move ([personal profile] make_your_move) wrote2006-07-14 10:48 am
Entry tags:

Question

reposted from [livejournal.com profile] archway with permission.


In a large number of ways, I find LESS emotional risk in sex than in demonstrating and receiving romance .

It takes more courage to offer tokens of time, silliness, thoughtfulness, and affection than it does to indulge in lust.

This makes me curious. It also makes me want to man the torpedoes and address the issue!

The other half of this little conundrum is the courage of the receiver.

If you are poly, where does romance stand in the web of consideration for you, your partner, your secondaries, etc.?

I am curious to any thoughts on this/these topics.

Romance is more important

[identity profile] sierra-victor.livejournal.com 2006-07-14 05:42 pm (UTC)(link)
Emotion, caring, all that stuff, is more important.

Sex, good sex, great sex, can have all of that. The very best sex must have it.

But, sex itself can be meaningless. You can cum and hate it as you get off. You can cum and it can be great, but without love, romance, caring, it just sex.

Too much of that kind of thing can leave you feeling hollow and down. It's like the tummy-ache you get from eating too much candy. It was tasty at the time, but afterwards you really regret eating in the first place.

So, is romance more risky? Hell, yeah. OK, so no one ever got AIDs from holding hands. Over the years, jeeze decades, I've been around polyness, I've seen many more relationships go down in flames because of issues of romance, caring, committment, than ever to do with sex in and of itself.

Sex is the wood, the coal. It's what we can all see. But, it's the fire, dancing, changing, never-ever quite the same, that's romance and can both warm and burn us.

S_V