I am here to challenge you! (Well, okay, no, I'm mostly here to pimp porn to you, but "challenge you" sounds better, I think. *considers modifying LJ mission statement*)
I am partnered and you are partnered, so I assume we're having similar amounts of sex, whereas I assume that the single people on my flist are having little or no sex. Which is, of course, a pretty poor assumption to make.
One of the odd things I've learned in the past few years - although mostly through RL as opposed to LJ - is that - well, okay. I also used to assume that that if you were partnered, you were having fairly regular, satisfying sex, unless there was a problem, like one of you had just had a baby or hip surgery or something. But then I found out that, no, actually a lot of my partnered friends (and especially, oddly enough, Best Beloved's partnered friends) are not having sex. I first discovered this because one of BB's friends expressed shock that we are still having sex. And said friend was herself partnered at the time, and had been for six years, and had not had sex for five of them.
BB and I were stunned by this revelation, but the friend didn't think it was really that strange.
But since then, more and more often, we've been getting the, "You're married and still having sex thing?" And part of that is that people expect lesbians not to have sex, but part of it is just - these days, lots of people in long-term relationships, whether gay or straight, seem not to have sex. (There was even a cover story in, I think, the New Yorker several years ago on just this topic.)
So, my long-winded point is: I don't assume that partnered means having sex anymore.
The attractive thing is tricky. Veerrrrry tricky.
I admit, I'm really curious about how that turns out, because I have a definite opinion on this even though I've hardly seen any of my friends list.
no subject
I am partnered and you are partnered, so I assume we're having similar amounts of sex, whereas I assume that the single people on my flist are having little or no sex. Which is, of course, a pretty poor assumption to make.
One of the odd things I've learned in the past few years - although mostly through RL as opposed to LJ - is that - well, okay. I also used to assume that that if you were partnered, you were having fairly regular, satisfying sex, unless there was a problem, like one of you had just had a baby or hip surgery or something. But then I found out that, no, actually a lot of my partnered friends (and especially, oddly enough, Best Beloved's partnered friends) are not having sex. I first discovered this because one of BB's friends expressed shock that we are still having sex. And said friend was herself partnered at the time, and had been for six years, and had not had sex for five of them.
BB and I were stunned by this revelation, but the friend didn't think it was really that strange.
But since then, more and more often, we've been getting the, "You're married and still having sex thing?" And part of that is that people expect lesbians not to have sex, but part of it is just - these days, lots of people in long-term relationships, whether gay or straight, seem not to have sex. (There was even a cover story in, I think, the New Yorker several years ago on just this topic.)
So, my long-winded point is: I don't assume that partnered means having sex anymore.
The attractive thing is tricky. Veerrrrry tricky.
I admit, I'm really curious about how that turns out, because I have a definite opinion on this even though I've hardly seen any of my friends list.