How many lovers?

[Sunstone]

What's the best number of lovers for a person to have during his or her lifetime? What's the least number of lovers you should have? What's the largest number of lovers you should have?

I recall from an anthropology class that one culture used to say a woman should have 2 or 3 lovers before marriage, and none afterwards. What do you think of that view?

Do spouses count as lovers?

Your opinions, please.

 

[jewscout]

I'm not really sure that there should be a set number of lovers one should have before settling down...i guess it all comes down to the individual...i had 2 before Rachel

 

[michel]

What's the best number of lovers for a person to have during his or her lifetime? What's the least number of lovers you should have? What's the largest number of lovers you should have?

I recall from an anthropology class that one culture used to say a woman should have 2 or 3 lovers before marriage, and none afterwards. What do you think of that view?

Do spouses count as lovers?

Your opinions, please.

Personally, only one at a time....
I would certainly count a spouse as a lover; otherwise you're talking celibacy.
I can't see that there's any answer to your question; there may be some validity in having a lover before marriage - preferably with the one whom you intend to marry - so as to avoid that 'OOps; sorry, did'nt know you felt that way about....'
Marie and I have been faithful to each other the whole of our marriage; I know I don't even have to ask her; and vice-versa.

 

[Sunstone]

I suppose putting a number on it ignores the quality of the relationships one has, and focuses instead on the quantity. It makes me wonder why that ancient culture we discussed in my anthropology class ever bothered to specify that women have 2 or 3 lovers before marriage and none after.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

In Christian theology, the unity that sexual intercourse brings between a man and woman in marriage is a powerful metaphor to the unity which Christ has with the church both spiritually and physically through the Eucharist. Therefore, since we have one union with Christ, we should have only one sexual union with our spouce.

 

[Druidus]

It depends greatly on the individual. Technically (biologically), humans are polygamous, but we don't have to be, if we don't want to.

I would specify no set number. However many lovers you want, in your lifetime.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

It depends greatly on the individual. Technically (biologically), humans are polygamous, but we don't have to be, if we don't want to.

I would specify no set number. However many lovers you want, in your lifetime.

A more precise statement would be "however many lovers want you."

 

[michel]

It depends greatly on the individual. Technically (biologically), humans are polygamous, but we don't have to be, if we don't want to.

I would specify no set number. However many lovers you want, in your lifetime.

That is something that has allways made me wonder if the human race is not 'above itself' in that it goes against nature's ways.

 

[Valjean]

I agree with Druidus. People have different psychologies, drives, &c. Some people can take a casual lover with no more psychic sequelae than they'd have picking a bowling partner. Others invest sex with a great deal pf psychic or religious baggage and would be overcome with guilt even if they only "lusted in their hearts" for an extramarital liaison.

The same situation obtains in different cultures. The role sex traditionally plays varies a lot. Druidus may be able to comment on the casual attitude toward sex in traditional Innuit societies, for example.

 

[johnnys4life]

Well I'm sure all the guys are going to disagree with me but I think it should be one. I've only had one, and I married him. I can't think of a single girl who could look back on any of her past boyfriends and say, "Dang, I wish I'd slept with him!" In fact all my friends and myself included felt quite the opposite, we'd look back on all our ex's and think, "Dang, I'm glad I didn't sleep with him!!" And my friends who did have more than one, none of THEM were bragging about it, I had to be there when they broke up and cried and got big wads of goo all over my shoulder, so no I don't see any point in it.

Of course your spouse counts! Why not?

 

[Druidus]

The same situation obtains in different cultures. The role sex traditionally plays varies a lot. Druidus may be able to comment on the casual attitude toward sex in traditional Innuit societies, for example.

Good example (though it's changed mostly, today)! Only some 200 years ago, the Inuit still practiced their traditional cultures, regarding sex. There was no real time to have sex, except when you wanted (ie, marriage wasn't necessary, per se). They didn't have to do it in seclusion, and sometimes, they would do it in front of the rest of the family. The Inuit did have marriages, but oftimes would have sex with others even within it. They practiced a tradition called "wife-swapping", which allowed the men (and, I suppose, the women, though they got no say in the matter) to sample the wives of others.

Does this make them in any way wrong? No. It's just a different culture, which affects the individual. They grew up with this, and it was perfectly normal to them. Thus, most of the individuals would live as the cultural norm dictated.

I'm not sure of the name anymore, but the first person who reached the north pole did a wife swap with an inuit man, for a while.

 

[cardero]

How many lovers?
It's quality not quantity.

 

[johnnys4life]

Hmm...well I may be open-minded about some things but that wife swapping deal sounds like a lot of trouble. If my husband even joked about something like that, I would probably kick his butt and hard.

 

[Druidus]

Hmm...well I may be open-minded about some things but that wife swapping deal sounds like a lot of trouble. If my husband even joked about something like that, I would probably kick his butt and hard.

lol!

I, too, have a disdain for meaningless sex. Sure, it might feel good, but it feels a lot better with a person you can connect with, emotionally, mentally, and sexually. I don't think I'll have sex until I meet such a person.

I don't think "meaningless" sex is wrong, intrinsically, but I just don't think it'd be that enjoyable for me.

 

[Bastet]

It depends greatly on the individual. Technically (biologically), humans are polygamous, but we don't have to be, if we don't want to.

I would specify no set number. However many lovers you want, in your lifetime.

A more precise statement would be "however many lovers want you."

Well, actually, if you want to get pedantic (which is something I never do ), a more precise statement would be "however many lovers you want, who also want you". Rape works both ways, people.

 

[Yerda]

I, too, have a disdain for meaningless sex.

Can you define meaningless sex?

Sure, it might feel good, but it feels a lot better with a person you can connect with, emotionally, mentally, and sexually.

What do you mean when you say emotional, mental, and sexual connection?

 

[Druidus]

Can you define meaningless sex?

Meaningless for me would be without the prescence defined of all below connections.

What do you mean when you say emotional, mental, and sexual connection?

Sexual: The sexual drive. The physical attraction.
Emotional: The "love". The feeling of love that transcends the physical.
Mental: I would like a women who can think, and debate on an intellectual level with me.

 

[Yerda]

Meaningless for me would be without the prescence defined of all below connections.

Sexual: The sexual drive. The physical attraction.
Emotional: The "love". The feeling of love that transcends the physical.
Mental: I would like a women who can think, and debate on an intellectual level with me.

These sound like very good attractors in a long-term relationship. Are you sure they are entirely relvant to a sexual encounter?

The first one I agree with, attraction is the most important for me. On emotional terms I don't think love is important at all. A bit of chemistry is good, like mental foreplay, it definitely improves the standard. Intellectual exchange, in my experience adds nothing to the pleasure.

 

[Ceridwen018]

I'll come back and reply to this thread in about 20 or 30 years.

Right now though, I only want one lover. Whacha!

 

[Druidus]

These sound like very good attractors in a long-term relationship. Are you sure they are entirely relvant to a sexual encounter?

Even if I am in a short term relationship, I prefer to have these.

On emotional terms I don't think love is important at all. A bit of chemistry is good, like mental foreplay, it definitely improves the standard.

Yes, the chemicals are important to me.

Intellectual exchange, in my experience adds nothing to the pleasure.

Well, I haven't had the experience yet, but I think that being able to respect my partner intellectually is important to me, possibly the most important of them all (though I would not use this one mutally exclusive to the others). However, in general, I do agree that during the experience, debating will not help much, and can, in fact, hinder your enjoyment.