Is there meaning to marriage without physical attraction/desire?

[toinena]

I disagree. I feel physical attraction is a must. I could not be involved with someone I don't find physically attractive. It may be less important as time goes on, but initially it needs to be there. There is nothing more spiritual about ignoring ones looks in the name if romance. Also I would not want to be with someone that did not find me physically attractive.

Funny thing is all these "looks don't matter" people always end up with nice looking partners. Hmm...

Also the question should not be anything else. This is HIS life, his thoughts, his wonders and his concerns. To dismiss them by using some Jesus juke doesn't make his questions invalid. That is simply the Christian version of being politically correct, or as I like to call it religiously correct.

I stand corrected. What I can read out of this (after a good sleep) is that if you get married without any attraction (and yes... I have also turned down men because of their looks.. I am not that idealistic) for me it sounds like a want to conform to the societies norm of what is expected. And marriage out of duty to men (people) is living a lie. So I cut the crap and say don't lose either head or heart. An attraction can be om many levels. But what ever you do. Don't leave God out of it.

 

[Lynx]

If we answer the question "no, there's no meaning to marriage without physical attraction", does that mean we're implying the converse that the main meaning and point to marriage is the physical attraction and sex?

Exactly what I was thinking while I was about halfway through reading the thread. If there's no meaning in marriage without physical attraction, what are we saying marriage is really for?

Personally I always thought it was for two people to face the world and help each other get through life together instead of going it alone. But then I've never been married so I could be wrong.

 

[Ugly]

I stand corrected. What I can read out of this (after a good sleep) is that if you get married without any attraction (and yes... I have also turned down men because of their looks.. I am not that idealistic) for me it sounds like a want to conform to the societies norm of what is expected. And marriage out of duty to men (people) is living a lie. So I cut the crap and say don't lose either head or heart. An attraction can be om many levels. But what ever you do. Don't leave God out of it.

So wanting someone physically attractive is conforming to the world? And who said anything about leaving God out of it? Just another Jesus juke. I see a lot of people love to state the most obvious in an attempt to sound spiritual, but it doesn't sound spiritual. It sounds like someone who has no real thoughts of their own, or anything to back up their statements. So they say something they think Sounds spiritual to somehow validate their claims. Once again, it doesn't work.
Who's getting married out of duty to men? Where is anything even close to that ever mentioned? This man, during thoughts about marriage, wondered if his lack of interest in sex may cause an issue if he ever chooses to get married. Where is there any conforming to society? Where is there any duty to man? How is God being left out?
I see you stating a number of things being said but i can't find a single one of them, or even an implication of them.

 

[tourist]

Physical attraction is not a must. If you see the statistics om divorce in arranged marriage they are lower than those based on free love and free choice. You can say that they grow into loving eachother, but a western marriage fall apart when you grow out of love. To lose my head in physical attraction was the reason why I got married. I saw the signs. I shouldn't have married him. But. Because I gave in to that attraction I lost my brains....Not that I advocate arranged marriage, but if I get married again, the flesh will not have the final saying on the matter.

I'm sure that your future husband will find you physically attractive. You will find him to be physically attractive too.

 

[Yeraza_Bats]

From Tinuviel (multiquote cut it off apparently : p)Personally, I would never marry a man with that attitude. The idea of being in a marriage without God-given sexual intimacy and raising children is unthinkable to me now, when I have no one particular that I am thinking of as a husband.
I don't think the Bible really says one way or another; of course, most of the time marriages involve sex so that is mentioned, and the command is given to be fruitful and multiply.

I always thought that if I had children, Id rather adopt. I mean there are children out there that need homes, and its a good way to fight against abortion, which is something I hate. I think it would be good to adopt a child.

Also, its not really an "attitude". I mean I even see many people here on this site who hold the belief that people are "hard wired" to be attracted to the opposite sex. I dont really hold that belief, as its not really something I feel.
That doesnt mean I cant look at a girl and think she looks nice or cute or whatever, Im just talking about the physical desire.

Without physical attraction and desire, in other word chemistry, such a marriage would be seriously lacking. Of course, you could have strictly a relationship living together as friends (male and female) and sharing the expenses but one or the other may develop certain feelings and passions and such an arrangement may become problematic.

Well, one thing I can say from personal expiernece, is that I can totally feel like... affectionate and intimate with someone without having to do that act, you know? : p So I dont feel like it would be missing anything personally.
I mean, I understand if someone else feels that way, but I have found that the act doesnt really connect with the feelings of affection.
But I mean, thats why I started this thread, to hear what others thought and how the viewed it, so Im not here to tell anyone they are wrong : p

If we answer the question "no, there's no meaning to marriage without physical attraction", does that mean we're implying the converse that the main meaning and point to marriage is the physical attraction and sex?

So, what are your thoughts on the topic?

Why don't you just get a best friend of the opposite sex?

That sounds like what you are looking for, I imagine the same time and effort apply.

There are people that are physically handicapped that do what you are talking about but we'll....they are physically handicapped so they don't have a choice.

Physical relations is supposed to be part of marriage because it's part of intimacy.

Or how about a virtual marriage on the net it's pretty much the same thing.

Well, yeah I mean I figure thats what everyone is looking for, right? And marriage is a promise to be together for life, to take care of each other and not betray each other. I mean, thats what I want you know? : p I mean, just being like best friends on an earthly stance, that doesnt mean they cant go and promise themselves to someone else. I do want the dedication to be with each other. Im just off about the physical parts of it.

And like I said before, I believe its totally possible to feel intimate with another person without the act. And of course, Im not posting that to tell others they are wrong, as this was all about hearing others thoughts. I just wanted to share my thoughts too : p

 

[toinena]

So wanting someone physically attractive is conforming to the world? And who said anything about leaving God out of it? Just another Jesus juke. I see a lot of people love to state the most obvious in an attempt to sound spiritual, but it doesn't sound spiritual. It sounds like someone who has no real thoughts of their own, or anything to back up their statements. So they say something they think Sounds spiritual to somehow validate their claims. Once again, it doesn't work.
Who's getting married out of duty to men? Where is anything even close to that ever mentioned? This man, during thoughts about marriage, wondered if his lack of interest in sex may cause an issue if he ever chooses to get married. Where is there any conforming to society? Where is there any duty to man? How is God being left out?
I see you stating a number of things being said but i can't find a single one of them, or even an implication of them.

I am not sure if you are trying to pick a fight or to make a point here. And i am not in the mood for fighting. I just go refer to my first post in this thread, that it might very well be that you can grow into loving each other, and then an initial physical attraction is not required.

I think we all should let a dictator choose our spouse. Then we don't have to think. And we don't have to feel, either. A joined effort between Planned Parenthood and the New World Order. ;-)

 

[cinder]

So, what are your thoughts on the topic?

Let's see my thoughts, I do understand your position about finding it difficult to connect sex with the idea of affection and intimacy. From personal experience I also kind of understand how as a person gets closer to someone emotionally, the idea of getting closer physically becomes more attractive as well. Overall I think sex is overemphasized in our society, and I see far to many problems with the idea that marriage without the physical attraction and sex is meaningless. For example, and as some others have pointed out, what happens when looks fade and one partner becomes not as attractive, what happens if one partner becomes disabled or physically incapable of having sex? If we hold the view that marriage without sex is meaningless, then is that enough reason to end the marriage? Yet when we think about the traditional wedding vows, while sexual union is understood, couples don't vow I will have sex with you (perhaps because most people find that an easy thing to do and they don't need vows to make them do it) but they do vow to stick it out through sickness, health, poverty, wealth and pretty much anything else life throws their way.

Having said all that, most people expect sex to be part of the marriage relationship and I would think any intention for the relationship to function without sex should be something discussed well in advance of the marriage. Other than that, I tend to hold the opinion that what happens (or in this case doesn't happen) between the two of them in the bedroom is the business of the couple and not of anyone else telling them how they need to be married. If they want advice that's fine, but they certainly have the right to tell people to butt out if they don't want to be inundated with how other people think they should conduct this aspect of their marriage.

 

[maxwel]

I disagree. I feel physical attraction is a must. I could not be involved with someone I don't find physically attractive. It may be less important as time goes on, but initially it needs to be there. There is nothing more spiritual about ignoring ones looks in the name if romance. Also I would not want to be with someone that did not find me physically attractive.

Funny thing is all these "looks don't matter" people always end up with nice looking partners. Hmm...

Also the question should not be anything else. This is HIS life, his thoughts, his wonders and his concerns. To dismiss them by using some Jesus juke doesn't make his questions invalid. That is simply the Christian version of being politically correct, or as I like to call it religiously correct.

I feel the same way.

That's why I mostly hit on blind women.

 

[Fenner]

Yazarra, maybe you're A sexual, I don't know. I think like some others have said, there might not be a right answer to your question. It's hard for me to say because I have a pretty traditional, probably very Leave It To Beaver kind of marriage, more modern version, but we're attracted to each other. Anyhow you change as you age and the equipment and hormones change things.

From my view, in my own life of course, sex is more important to him than it is me. I think for him it makes him feel closer to me and to me I'm more the time spending, cuddling, holding hands is more important to me. Frankly I could spend years celibate and wouldn't care, but there are other woman who would go crazy. Sex is nice but overrated in my opinion.

I used to work in a retirement home. There was a few of the widows and widowers who met at the home and got married. I'm not saying that just because there's snow on the roof that their ain't no fire in the oven, but I do think many people get married mostly for the companionship.

 

[Pipp]

I don't think it would be impossible to find someone who feels exactly like you do. To me personally it might feel more like living with a roommate ( or best friend ) than a spouse.
I also do wonder as Ugly said if you found the right person if maybe those feelings you don't experience now might come out as your affection for her grows. Either way...I'd just make sure you discuss the subject thoroughly before deciding to get married. Best of luck my dear friend

 

[bobbyrg6]

I think one of the gifts of marriage is that we can learn to know God better through learning to love our partners, and the marriage commitment is a stronger bond that allows us to do this more securely and intimately than perhaps we could outside of marriage. So that's one reason marriage can still be a worthwhile pursuit without the sexual element.

But I think family and romance are two major strengths of marriage that most people desire. But I'm sure there are still plenty of people out there who feel similarly to you. What you describe sounds like asexuality, which affects about 1% of the population. I'd imagine most of that community would be happy with a sexless marriage. Some people are also aromantic, meaning they have no romantic desires either. Marriage is still a fine option if you desire that stronger commitment, but it wouldn't be particularly necessary. As you say, just finding a strong platonic bond with someone would probably be sufficient.

 

[tourist]

I've definitely experienced that as well. I think, that when you love someone and enjoy their company (doesn't have to be in a romantic way) you are apt to think them good-looking. So, even if by society's standards they are not attractive and you did not find them so when you met them, physical attraction can spring from a liking for their character...if that makes sense??

Makes perfect sense to me.

 

[GaryA]

If we answer the question "no, there's no meaning to marriage without physical attraction", does that mean we're implying the converse that the main meaning and point to marriage is the physical attraction and sex?

Let's see my thoughts, I do understand your position about finding it difficult to connect sex with the idea of affection and intimacy. From personal experience I also kind of understand how as a person gets closer to someone emotionally, the idea of getting closer physically becomes more attractive as well. Overall I think sex is overemphasized in our society, and I see far to many problems with the idea that marriage without the physical attraction and sex is meaningless. For example, and as some others have pointed out, what happens when looks fade and one partner becomes not as attractive, what happens if one partner becomes disabled or physically incapable of having sex? If we hold the view that marriage without sex is meaningless, then is that enough reason to end the marriage? Yet when we think about the traditional wedding vows, while sexual union is understood, couples don't vow I will have sex with you (perhaps because most people find that an easy thing to do and they don't need vows to make them do it) but they do vow to stick it out through sickness, health, poverty, wealth and pretty much anything else life throws their way.

Having said all that, most people expect sex to be part of the marriage relationship and I would think any intention for the relationship to function without sex should be something discussed well in advance of the marriage. Other than that, I tend to hold the opinion that what happens (or in this case doesn't happen) between the two of them in the bedroom is the business of the couple and not of anyone else telling them how they need to be married. If they want advice that's fine, but they certainly have the right to tell people to butt out if they don't want to be inundated with how other people think they should conduct this aspect of their marriage.

Some people say that sex is the 'glue' that holds a marriage together. I understand what they mean, but I [ partially ] have to disagree. I think that the closest-and-best-friend-companionship aspect of marriage has to be both the 'core' and the 'glue'. ( The relationship is the core, and love is the glue. <record-needle-screeching-sound> Okay -- in reality, determination is the 'glue'. Love may come and go. But, the desire to "make it work" is what ultimately becomes the 'glue'. ) If you don't have that -- what kind of marriage do you have? Well -- you have one that needs sex to hold it together...

If the glue fails - for whatever reason, as you have indicated - then, so does the marriage.

But...

If the core of your marriage is the closest-and-best-friend-companionship bond between husband and wife -- having been formed between two people who are determined to "make it work" -- "come hell or high water" -- then, you have something that will hold up to the test of time.

Of course, sex helps to build that bond.

Personally - I want the full-and-complete relationship - sex included!

However, I also believe that the sex aspect of it is just that - one aspect of it -- not to be ignored -- nor should it be the fulcrum upon which the whole marriage is balanced.

Don't get me wrong -- I believe that sex is a very important part of a marital relationship. And, if a husband and wife - who expect to be able to enjoy that part of the relationship - are, for whatever reason, not able to enjoy it -- it can certainly "put a dent" in things...

However, anyone who gets married with the belief that the sexual aspect of the relationship is-and-will-always-be the 'glue' that will hold the marriage together ----- well, I think they are setting themselves up for some serious failure eventually...

 

[GaryA]

All of that said -- I have pondered the question of whether or not I could "handle" a sexless marriage.

For me - it might be something I could do --- but, it is certainly not ideal by any means...

My desire is to have the best possible relationship with my wife.

That means us enjoying every possible part of life that we can share together.

So...

 

[OneFaith]

Alright, Im gonna totally open up and get personal about myself here, cuz this is something that I think about alot and would like some guidance on. And of course I would want the help of other Christians : p

But yeah, so uhh... the desire to have physical relations isnt really something I deal with. I mean, its like Im like "ew, yuck!" or anything. But I just dont have those kinda feelings. And I think about that alot, and what the Bible says about marriage and physical relations, and I wonder like... is there a reason for me to be married? Or also like, would anyone feel comfortable being married to someone who feels that way (Im talking Biblical marriage of course).

I get that marriage is more than just relations, and that its about companionship and other junk. And thats my biggest motivation, of course : p Id really like to find that best friend who wants to stick with each other until death. That is very much a desire I feel : p

But, you know, Id like to hear others thoughts. Like, put yourself in that situation, the idea of marrying someone who didnt have those feelings. How do you feel about it? What are your thoughts? Do you believe its even right? Id like to hear whatever it is you think about it : p

You shouldn't marry the person if those feelings aren't there. But if they were there and are now gone, get them back. If you can't get them back, you are still married for better or worse. Jesus does not give permission to divorce based on feelings. Make sure those feelings you marry with are an attraction to who that person is and not what they look like, cause beauty fades. Be with them for the right reason- cause you love who they are.

 

[Yeraza_Bats]

You shouldn't marry the person if those feelings aren't there. But if they were there and are now gone, get them back. If you can't get them back, you are still married for better or worse. Jesus does not give permission to divorce based on feelings. Make sure those feelings you marry with are an attraction to who that person is and not what they look like, cause beauty fades. Be with them for the right reason- cause you love who they are.

I wouldnt divorce someone cuz I didnt feel that kind of physical attraction >.>
I would marry for the desire to be with someone for life, and to have a friend that would never leave me. It would definitely be loving who they are.

 

[CaptainGoat]

Alright, Im gonna totally open up and get personal about myself here, cuz this is something that I think about alot and would like some guidance on. And of course I would want the help of other Christians : p

But yeah, so uhh... the desire to have physical relations isnt really something I deal with. I mean, its like Im like "ew, yuck!" or anything. But I just dont have those kinda feelings. And I think about that alot, and what the Bible says about marriage and physical relations, and I wonder like... is there a reason for me to be married? Or also like, would anyone feel comfortable being married to someone who feels that way (Im talking Biblical marriage of course).

I get that marriage is more than just relations, and that its about companionship and other junk. And thats my biggest motivation, of course : p Id really like to find that best friend who wants to stick with each other until death. That is very much a desire I feel : p

But, you know, Id like to hear others thoughts. Like, put yourself in that situation, the idea of marrying someone who didnt have those feelings. How do you feel about it? What are your thoughts? Do you believe its even right? Id like to hear whatever it is you think about it : p

Can I ask the question. (I'm late to this thread). Is it companion ship as meaning a close friend that attracts you or is it more? As one can have a close friend where there is nothing more to it then a good friendship.
Though I've never been married, if I dont feel an attraction I dont believe I could marry as we are not just spiritual beings. A suitable opposite sex needs to have a decimate attraction and this does not necessarily mean in looking attractive but has an attractive aspect that makes you desire the person in a different form to friendship.
As I'm a man, I've seen very attractive ladies in a physical sense but as character goes are the opposite and no way would I want to be with them! (I value my life! ). I've seen others not blessed with attractive bodies but have really attractive characters.
{Hopefully when God sends me the right person she will have both aspects! }.
Going back to the point why I'm asking. For me, the way I feel when I see an attractive lady (Thankfully in our eyes we all have different views on what is attractive or a few would be married and all else would be single!... God knows what He is doing!) I feel a physical attraction to the lady.
Now if you dont feel that that is OK. Nothing wrong with that. But I do ask if it is friendship you need which can come without being married and without any form of physical relationship. In other words, you just like the company of a few friends.
If it is more then this, then it could be you have not met the right person, or maybe you are yet to develop physical feelings? I dont know. I can only relate to my own personal thoughts and feelings and how I react etc.
I will say that there is nothing wrong and I'm glad you are open and honest.

 

[CaptainGoat]

I am told by my mum who was married from her early 20's right to 2007 when my dad went home, (She had been courting him since she was 15), that the physical attraction is when you are in your young adult years and wanes a bit through middle age and it is love that carries the marriage through into ones older years. (Love as in less reliance in sexual feeling but more as someone you can't think of being without! Not saying older people dont have sex! I have no clue on this!!! ).

 

[Yeraza_Bats]

Can I ask the question. (I'm late to this thread). Is it companion ship as meaning a close friend that attracts you or is it more? As one can have a close friend where there is nothing more to it then a good friendship.

I mean, yeah, it is friendship that I desire. But a more deep and personal kind of friendship than just casual friends : p I mean friends go off and start their lives, they get married and have kids and all that, and those things become the focus of their life. Theyll still have time for you here and there, theyll invite to their family events sometimes, or meet your for a drink every now and then or whatever. But their marriage and family take importance over everything else.

I want that in my life, too : p And I would even not mind having a child one day together. There are just some feelings that I dont feel myself, and I was curious about others thoughts.

 

[CaptainGoat]

It could just be God has you waiting to meet the right person for you. Dont worry about it. I'm sure all is OK.