Sex and intimacy

[Avery_Chisholm]

Sex can be many things, though it doesn't have to be intimate. It's way better when it is, though!

Intimacy is a closeness you feel that allows you to be open to the other person and open with the other person. It doesn't have to be in the context of sex - you can have intimate relationships with your friends, roommates, sisters, etc.

I think when you have intimacy in a sexual relationship, there's an element of acceptance of the other person that makes you comfortable with each other and adds to the intensity of the experience - intercourse is hot, but intercourse where you're able to look into each other's eyes the whole time you're fucking is sizzling hot.

I honestly don't think you can just turn intimacy on or off, though. It does have a lot to do with chemistry, and love, and it's something that has to develop over time.

Those who claim to be able to turn it on or off are either exceptionally good at compartmentalizing (or think they are), or the intimacy wasn't really there in the first place. Sex doesn't require either chemistry or love - just some horny lust in some cases.

Interesting question - I may have to think about it and write some more later!

exactly what i thought

 

[M's girl]

By the same token, because I can honestly say that sex with my wife is beter than anything I've ever had with anyone else, I attribute how good it is to that intimacy. I really don't think sex would be better without the intimacy.

You are getting to the essence of what I was looking for..... I think.

 

[ewopper]

I had a discussion the other night with someone about sex and intimacy. How the two are connected; how women look at this differently from men sometimes; why some people seem to be able to switch off emotions so easily for sex.... things like that.

I thought it would be a valid question to ask here, with so many experts all aboard Lit!

So, what is intimacy to you and what is sex to you? And do you think there can be one without the other? How do you define intimacy? And what is your way to show affection to your loved one? Does that equal intimacy?

Oh, and I have to clarify (maybe) that with sex I mean all acts of a sexual nature (not only PIV sex) ....

Since most women today that I've talked to would rather be slam fucked than made gentle love to, I'd have to say intimacy has virtually gone the way of the edsel. I myself prefer gentle intimate love making hugging, caressing, touching, melding into one. Rough sex to me is although intense it leaves a void that's just my opinion

 

[fingermagic]

I had a discussion the other night with someone about sex and intimacy. How the two are connected; how women look at this differently from men sometimes; why some people seem to be able to switch off emotions so easily for sex.... things like that.

I thought it would be a valid question to ask here, with so many experts all aboard Lit!

So, what is intimacy to you and what is sex to you? And do you think there can be one without the other? How do you define intimacy? And what is your way to show affection to your loved one? Does that equal intimacy?

Oh, and I have to clarify (maybe) that with sex I mean all acts of a sexual nature (not only PIV sex) ....

You can not seperate sex and intimacy. The very act of sex with another person has to incorporate intimacy. Without it, you can not have sex with another.

 

[M's girl]

Since most women today that I've talked to would rather be slam fucked than made gentle love to......

WHERE the hell are you?

That's not what I hear. That's what triggered my question, but it was a woman complaining about men being intimate-wise detached from sex and love!

 

[M's girl]

You can not seperate sex and intimacy. The very act of sex with another person has to incorporate intimacy. Without it, you can not have sex with another.

Apparently and unfortunately that's not true. Of course, when you have sex, you are close to each other physically. I don't call thát intimacy per sé. It can be, but picture yourself in very busy public transport. You're a hell of a lot closer to someone sometimes than you've been to your partner lately.... maybe..

But I'm not kidding. That may be the problem between (some) men and women; their definition of intimacy...

The intimacy I am talking about (and most women are talking about IMHO) is the kind that does not even include physical intimacy in the first place, because it's about feeling appreciated, secure, loved and all those things.

 

[fingermagic]

Apparently and unfortunately that's not true. Of course, when you have sex, you are close to each other physically. I don't call thát intimacy per sé. It can be, but picture yourself in very busy public transport. You're a hell of a lot closer to someone sometimes than you've been to your partner lately.... maybe..

But I'm not kidding. That may be the problem between (some) men and women; their definition of intimacy...

The intimacy I am talking about (and most women are talking about IMHO) is the kind that does not even include physical intimacy in the first place, because it's about feeling appreciated, secure, loved and all those things.

Yes, I understand the difference. I would rather take care of things myself if there is no "emotional intimacy". What is the point without it? Having said that, some men do indeed prefer the purely physical act with out the emotional involvement. This is why there are street hookers and brothels. I, however, do not see the point. I get better relief from my hand.

 

[pink swirl]

Yes, I understand the difference. I would rather take care of things myself if there is no "emotional intimacy". What is the point without it? Having said that, some men do indeed prefer the purely physical act with out the emotional involvement. This is why there are street hookers and brothels. I, however, do not see the point. I get better relief from my hand.

Hookers? All across the land, there are people having sex without intimacy, every weekend and sometimes on Thursday nights, too. One night stands are quite common on college campuses and singles bars everywhere. They call it hooking up these days, but you don't have to go to a prostitute for a purely physical act without the emotional involvement.

 

[TBKahuna123]

Yes, I understand the difference. I would rather take care of things myself if there is no "emotional intimacy". What is the point without it? Having said that, some men do indeed prefer the purely physical act with out the emotional involvement. This is why there are street hookers and brothels. I, however, do not see the point. I get better relief from my hand.

Ahhh but you just proved the point tha Scalywag proved with me. It's not necessarily our inability to seperate the two, but our unwillingness.

There is a doctrinal way of thinking in the catholic church that views sex as sacred. They use it to state that marriage should only be within wedlock, but I attach a much larger meaning to it myself. I believe that sex is sacred to the point that to strip it of all emotional connection(which I connect to initmacy) is to debase the beauty of the act and to make it void of it's true meaning. I feel that sex is more than physical pleasure, but a connection between the souls and psyche's of two human beings on a deeper, existential level. Sex devoid of emotional content would to me, be nothing but masturbation with someone to talk to.

 

[TBKahuna123]

Since most women today that I've talked to would rather be slam fucked than made gentle love to, I'd have to say intimacy has virtually gone the way of the edsel. I myself prefer gentle intimate love making hugging, caressing, touching, melding into one. Rough sex to me is although intense it leaves a void that's just my opinion

I disagree, rough sex doesn't have to be devoid of emoitonal or intimate connection, as I posted earlier in this thread:

I believe that when sex is at it's hottest, most animalistic and primal that's when we are most vulnerable. When we open ourselves deep enough to let our mating instincts take over we are tossing aside all our defenses, and this leave us naked and out of control, at the mercy of our partners. In the afterglow of such an act as you lay gasping and spent in the arms of your mate, you are trusting this other person with your raw and unguarded soul, open to attack both emotional and physical, yet trusting that they will not take advantage of your vulnerability. Is there anything more intimate than that?

My wife and I have these slow, gentle, drawn out sessions of slow passion all the time. There are also those times thoguh when she'll grab me by the back fo the head and say "fuck the shit out of me!" No matter what though, there is still a deep connection between us, both before, during and after the physical act is done.

I just had another thought though. Maybe it's not enough that some of us connect sex and intimacy. If we don't have a partner who also feels that connection, wouldn't that ruin the intimacy of the act? I think it takes two to make this connection, and both have to be willing to feel it. thoughts? Comments?

 

[Guest]

 

[Guest]

 

[rwattsIII]

My gf should be on her way here shortly. We haven't seen each other since Monday morning (typically would have been Sunday morning, but Monday was Martin Luther King Day). We'll hung and kiss when she first arrives of course, maybe have a cup of tea and if I still have a couple of things to do she'll read the newspaper that I have at the kitchen table for her. And then we'll head for bed for what we both fondly refer to as cuddle time until it's time to get up and get dinner. Most often we get naked under the covers, but not always. We kiss and pet. Some times we nap. Most of there's some degree of mutual masturbation and occasionally intercourse. Of course if we're busy or she's needs to be late there's no cuddle time. I have the cutest voice-mail from her that I continue to save where she's tell me that she's going to be here on time to make sure that she gets her cuddle time which ends with her saying, "I want my cuddle time, damn it!"

 

[Guest]

 

[M's girl]

..... If we don't have a partner who also feels that connection, wouldn't that ruin the intimacy of the act? I think it takes two to make this connection, and both have to be willing to feel it. thoughts? Comments?

No comments. I agree 200%.

 

[TBKahuna123]

Did you mean to use "sex" instead of "marriage" here?

Whoops. yes I did.

 

[kiwichyck]

You can not seperate sex and intimacy. The very act of sex with another person has to incorporate intimacy. Without it, you can not have sex with another.

That was what I was trying to get at. The physical act of sex for me as a woman involves allowing another person access INSIDE my body.
How can that not be intimate?

I agree that physical intimacy and emotional intimacy is very different. Physical intimacy seem unavoidable but I think we make a decision about emotional intimacy. I for one choose both. I think sex without the emotional intimacy would just seriously screw me up mentally. In my mind that would reduce the act to it's basic function and remove the pleasure factor.

To clarify my earlier post about intimacy between friends and family. I mean that in the sense that I have intimacy with them because I have an emotional investment in those relationships. I reveal more about myself, I sympathise when they are hurting, I feel joy when they feel joy. I couldn't say the same about an aquaintance or stranger. Totally different to sex related intimacy though. Am I making any sense here?

 

[Guest]

 

[Snowman5933]

I define intimacy as feeling close, comfortable and connected to your SO. I feel intimate with my SO even when we are not making love. A simple hug, kiss or touch can be very intimate.

Sex by its very nature should be a very itimate physical act, but this is not always the case for me. I guess I work on levels of intimacy. Sometimes during sex I feel very intimate and connected to my SO and other times I have felt very detached and distant. I find that when I feel very connected I enjoy myself alot more. My SO prefers that close level of intimacy before sex and says that it deepens the experience for her.

Snowman

 

[rwattsIII]

Hmmm, cuddle time. I like that. Now, where can I send my kids off to?

So, true..... neither of us have kids at home.

 

[Norajane]

I define intimacy as feeling close, comfortable and connected to your SO. I feel intimate with my SO even when we are not making love. A simple hug, kiss or touch can be very intimate.

Sex by its very nature should be a very itimate physical act, but this is not always the case for me. I guess I work on levels of intimacy. Sometimes during sex I feel very intimate and connected to my SO and other times I have felt very detached and distant. I find that when I feel very connected I enjoy myself alot more. My SO prefers that close level of intimacy before sex and says that it deepens the experience for her.

Snowman

This is very interesting. Would you mind elaborating on when or why you sometimes feel detached and distant?

 

[sassy_girl1963]

Y'all are making me miss my sweetie so much....urgg I want my cuddle time too! But he is 2000 miles away........................

 

[M's girl]

That was what I was trying to get at. The physical act of sex for me as a woman involves allowing another person access INSIDE my body.

How can that not be intimate?

I agree, but I wanted to emphasize what you are saying here. Maybe that is why women NEED to have that intimacy on other levels?

That it is different for men, and that they can even sort of influence (or just don't care) at some times (sorry, don't mean to be rude or judgemental here but there is no other way, at this moment I can express myself better..) how - intimate - they feel goes to show here IMHO:

Quote Snowman:
Sex by its very nature should be a very itimate physical act, but this is not always the case for me. I guess I work on levels of intimacy. Sometimes during sex I feel very intimate and connected to my SO and other times I have felt very detached and distant. I find that when I feel very connected I enjoy myself alot more. My SO prefers that close level of intimacy before sex and says that it deepens the experience for her.
Unquote

 

[jerseyman1963]

I've been watching this thread with interest, and one thing I noticed was how relatively few people have jumped on this one to post and answer. Could the notion of intimacy freak that many people out? Or is it just that intimacy is becoming such a foreign a concept to the vast majority of us in our 24/7 lives that people are passing this post by as if it were written in a foreign language? Now that's a sad thought. Anyway, I think we all have to grant that while sex and intimacy may be inextricably linked for some of us personally, there is plenty of evidence that it is not so for everyone. Physical and emotional intimacy are two distinct things, and many people can separate them. Speaking personally, the best sex happens when the physical intimacy is with someone you ARE emotionally intimate with. Someone you want to touch and hold even when it's over, and possibly the next morning, too. There's few things that feel worse or more empty (not to mention awkward) than waking up the morning next to someone, and not wanting to be there. But I have this theory that it's actually harder to have great sex with someone you are emotionally intimate with, because you risk so much more. I'm not speaking about those of us who have been blessed to meet and stay with their soul mates (to use a cliche), but rather those of us for whom that hasn't happened (yet). If you're lucky enough to be in a relationship you know in your bones is stable, that stability gives you a freedom to explore, and become more physically AND emotionally intimate at the same time. But if you're not in that situation, I think when it comes to the physical act of sex, it's often easier to stick your neck out with someone you don't really know. If for example you say, "You know what I like? I like doing it in a vat of peanut butter," you don't risk too much if that person says, "Wow. That's really sick, and I'm outta here." You don't really know the person, and if you're rejected, you haven't risked much, and you just move on. But if it's someone you know well, for a long time, and care about, and whose presence in your life you feel strongly about, you're putting a lot on the line, because if they say, "Wow, that's sick. I'm outta here," then you've really put something valuable on the line. Of course, if they say, "OK, it sounds weird, but I'm willing to try it for you honey," well, you're on your way to a better relationship in so many ways. But for many, getting to that point is hard, and it's easier to take the easy road.

 

[M's girl]

I've been watching this thread with interest, and one thing I noticed was how relatively few people have jumped on this one to post and answer. Could the notion of intimacy freak that many people out?

I was thinking something of the sorts...

That's why I started this thread and maybe, just maybe I've got my answer because of the lack of response from a lot of people... Well, some, who are important to me here at Lit, have given me their opinion...

You also have a very good point about the sticking your neck out example. Very good point!