Empty sex

February 23, 2013

in Sexuality

Are you having empty sex? Are you getting all that God intended, or just a small part?

Running empty? Image Credit: © Nicemonkey | Dreamstime.com

Our society has made sex all about bodies and the sensations that sex gives our bodies. It is all about the physical pleasure; more physical pleasure means it is great sex, too little physical pleasure means it is poor sex. Personally, I think we have bought into a big fat lie!

I am not opposed to the physical pleasure of sex – on the contrary, I like it a great deal and have written a good bit aimed to help couples have greater physical pleasure when they have sex. However, there is a lot more to sex than what our bodies feel, and a lot more to enjoy about sex than the physical pleasure. Sex connects a husband and wife in a way that nothing else can. Sex bonds us, makes us feel close, helps us get past minor problems, and makes our love deeper. We can have all of those and the physical pleasure, but if we get too focused on the physical we hamper and/or miss much of the rest.

If I had to give up the physical pleasure or the other pleasures, I would choose to keep the rest and lose the physical. What’s more, I do not think that would reduce my desire to have sex in the least. As much as I would miss physical pleasure, I would miss the other things far more. If you think I am crazy, maybe there is more to sex than you have experienced.

As to the physical pleasure, do not think it is all about orgasm. Yes, that is the peak, but there is a great deal more physical pleasure to be had. Learn to feel pleasure from start to finish, and learn that much of that pleasure is felt with part of the body other than the penis. Be aware of every sensation, every nuance, and learn to enjoy all of them.

Can I get your help with a survey? This quick survey asks women and men if they have ever faked orgasm with their spouse. (Yes, men fake.)

Image Credit: © Nicemonkey | Dreamstime.com

14 comments
Thir7ySev3n
Thir7ySev3n

Just to be clear, maybe you are less general in your your definition of what constitutes physical pleasure that I am. When I say physical pleasure, I am reffering to anything at all that is physical and sexual in nature that provides pleasure. So I consider even nakedness, erotic scents and words as physical pleasure. That is not to say they are not emotional pleasures (which they are even more so than physical) but that is my point, I believe them to be inextricable. These acts are emotionally pleasurable because they are physically pleasurable, and they are physically pleasurable because they are emotionally pleasurable (since we are wired to need and desire physical affection). Hopefully that adds a little clarity to my original point.

Thir7ySev3n
Thir7ySev3n

Paul- Certainly, but I wasn't reffering to orgasm specifically but rather the physical aspect of sexual pleasure as a whole. More specifically, I was addressing your statement that if there was any aspect of sexual pleasure you had to give up, it would be the physical pleasure. But I don't think it's even possible to forfeit that without sacrificing the other associated benefits and pleasures. Sex is a physical act and by nature seems to require physical pleasure to have any significance for intimacy. How I see it is that is not by any means sufficient in itself to benefit intimacy but is certainly necessary. Again, for example, if looking at your wife naked felt the same as looking at any given plain and inanimate object, feeling her skin the same as feeling the keys on your keyboard, hearing her voice the same as hearing the rustling of leaves in the wind, what emotional significance would they have? These are all physical experiences and pleasures that seem inextricable from their emotional and spiritual consequences. You can seperate the emotional from the physical but can not seperate the physical from the emotional in sexual intimacy without forfeiting all of the other associated benefits. The physical enhances the emotional just as the emotional enhances the physical. Maybe I'm just being anal by designating that particular part of your post but it just stood out to me because it doesn't seem logical. Do you understand what I'm saying though?

Thir7ySev3n
Thir7ySev3n

Just to be clear, maybe you are less general in your your definition of what constitutes physical pleasure that I am. When I say physical pleasure, I am reffering to anything at all that is physical and sexual in nature that provides pleasure. So I consider even nakedness, erotic scents and words as physical pleasure. That is not to say they are not emotional pleasures (which they are even more so than physical) but that is my point, I believe them to be inextricable. These acts are emotionally pleasurable because they are physically pleasurable, and they are physically pleasurable because they are emotionally pleasurable (since we are wired to need and desire physical affection). Hopefully that adds a little clarity to my original point.

TheGenerousHusband
TheGenerousHusband

Thir7ySev3n - I don't disagreeable with you on the science, but it is possible to have climax without feeling orgasm (spinal damage in certain places can give this result) and then most of what you describe would still happen. My point was that the pleasure we call orgasm can become a sexual idol.

Thir7ySev3n
Thir7ySev3n

Paul- Certainly, but I wasn't reffering to orgasm specifically but rather the physical aspect of sexual pleasure as a whole. More specifically, I was addressing your statement that if there was any aspect of sexual pleasure you had to give up, it would be the physical pleasure. But I don't think it's even possible to forfeit that without sacrificing the other associated benefits and pleasures. Sex is a physical act and by nature seems to require physical pleasure to have any significance for intimacy. How I see it is that is not by any means sufficient in itself to benefit intimacy but is certainly necessary. Again, for example, if looking at your wife naked felt the same as looking at any given plain and inanimate object, feeling her skin the same as feeling the keys on your keyboard, hearing her voice the same as hearing the rustling of leaves in the wind, what emotional significance would they have? These are all physical experiences and pleasures that seem inextricable from their emotional and spiritual consequences. You can seperate the emotional from the physical but can not seperate the physical from the emotional in sexual intimacy without forfeiting all of the other associated benefits. The physical enhances the emotional just as the emotional enhances the physical. Maybe I'm just being anal by designating that particular part of your post but it just stood out to me because it doesn't seem logical. Do you understand what I'm saying though?

TheGenerousHusband
TheGenerousHusband moderator

Thir7ySev3n - I don't disagreeable with you on the science, but it is possible to have climax without feeling orgasm (spinal damage in certain places can give this result) and then most of what you describe would still happen. My point was that the pleasure we call orgasm can become a sexual idol. 

Willyhaya
Willyhaya

@themarriagebed a small part.

Thir7ySev3n
Thir7ySev3n

I agree with everything you said here Paul, and while I believe the physical pleasure is the least important, I also believe it is absolutely necessary and inextricably linked to the other benefits we receive from sex. It's the physical pleasure (primarily through sight and touch) that releases the oxytocin that makes us feel closer to our spouses emotionally. A large portion of what makes the experience so bonding is also that it produced physical sensations that no other pleasure in the world can compare to, and it's something only the spouses can give each other. If you took that away I can't see how the other benefits and pleasures of the sexual experience wouldn't suffer significantly. Imagine if the sight your wife's naked body provided the sane sensation you get when you look at the colour black, or that your body from head to toe was completely numb to her touch. In that case sexual intimacy becomes a rather useless and not so intimate extension of the emotional intimacy that mere conversation and presence provides. Without the physical pleasure, both through touch and visuals, sex would no longer have an intimate significance greater than that of simply connecting together through conversation fully clothed. There wouldn't be any reason to go beyond that for intimacy's sake. Again, I agree with physical pleasure being the least important, but based on the way God designed the body to integrate with the spirit and emotions, without it the other benefits of direct sexual contact really seem non existent.

Willyhaya
Willyhaya

@themarriagebed a small part.

Thir7ySev3n
Thir7ySev3n

I agree with everything you said here Paul, and while I believe the physical pleasure is the least important, I also believe it is absolutely necessary and inextricably linked to the other benefits we receive from sex. It's the physical pleasure (primarily through sight and touch) that releases the oxytocin that makes us feel closer to our spouses emotionally. A large portion of what makes the experience so bonding is also that it produced physical sensations that no other pleasure in the world can compare to, and it's something only the spouses can give each other. If you took that away I can't see how the other benefits and pleasures of the sexual experience wouldn't suffer significantly. Imagine if the sight your wife's naked body provided the sane sensation you get when you look at the colour black, or that your body from head to toe was completely numb to her touch. In that case sexual intimacy becomes a rather useless and not so intimate extension of the emotional intimacy that mere conversation and presence provides. Without the physical pleasure, both through touch and visuals, sex would no longer have an intimate significance greater than that of simply connecting together through conversation fully clothed. There wouldn't be any reason to go beyond that for intimacy's sake. Again, I agree with physical pleasure being the least important, but based on the way God designed the body to integrate with the spirit and emotions, without it the other benefits of direct sexual contact really seem non existent.

TheGenerousHusband
TheGenerousHusband

@Thir7ySev3n I was really making a theoretical argument, not a real one. For that purpose, I was thinking of climax specifically. I agree we can't have the one without the other, but if we could and I had to choose, the physical would be the one I would be more willing to lose.

TheGenerousHusband
TheGenerousHusband moderator

 @Thir7ySev3n I was really making a theoretical argument, not a real one. For that purpose, I was thinking of climax specifically. I agree we can't have the one without the other, but if we could and I had to choose, the physical would be the one I would be more willing to lose.

Thir7ySev3n
Thir7ySev3n

@TheGenerousHusband Ok yea that makes sense reffering to mere orgasm. Thank God (literally) we don't have to make that choice though lol

Thir7ySev3n
Thir7ySev3n

@TheGenerousHusband Ok yea that makes sense reffering to mere orgasm. Thank God (literally) we don't have to make that choice though lol

Previous post:

Next post: