Platonic intra-sexual relationships exist

[MrBishop]

That wasn't the question. If you KNEW that you could have sex with her without it interfering with your marriage, would you be interested (and note that it's not "would you DO it?")?

The point is that it's non-sexual...would I be interested. That's moot...who says that I have to be interested in every member of the opposite sex, regardless of how attractive they are to me?

That's not even the point though. At present, you've excluded any sexual relationship with her out of obligation to your wife, not because of any lack of desire of your own. If you lost your penis in an accident at age 20, would you consider it a revelation to find yourself in a non-sexual relationship with a woman?

This has little to do with any moral obligation to my wife. It also has lettle to do with getting my penis ripped out at age 20, or any such eunich-istic matters. It's a non-sexual relationship... strike that...I lean on my term for a moment (Plato-nic) . Based soley on social/mental contact...consciously.

Imagine it this way...if' you're a friend with GF, or Rose, or nixy etc... and you do not have sex with them, but in this case, not because there is a space between you and them ( "x" number of miles), but becuase there is an ideal. The ideal is this: Just because it is physically possible for you to have sex with this person does not mean that you have to...or, to throw your own arguement back at you... I don't have to prove that I'm a man by fucking every woman within arms reach.

Consider siblings...if you have opposite gender siblings...other than the morality of it all, what is stopping you from having sex with them? If you removed the mores, and thus the barriers and repurcussions, would you have sex with your sister? Why not?

 

[Luis G]

The point is...can you have a non-sexual relationship with someone of the opposite sex?

If you mean relationship as in friendship, yes it is possible only for one side, in my experience, when you have that kind of relationship and you are not interested in her, she'll be secretly interested in you, or viceversa.

 

[Gonz]

I gave her two massages (one full-body) and the other a back/neck/butt massage and she gave me a back massage with home-made scented oils.

We did not have sex. We did not even come close.

Yes, it is possible to have a platonic relationship between the sexes. Happens all the time. So does, "it just happened", which is where you were rapidly approaching. If you disagree, ask yourself this. Would you give your best male friend a full body massage? You're treading in dangerous territory, be careful.

 

[chcr]

But if you do find them attractive, they're not intelligent or worthwhile?

Don't know, I'm too busy trying to figure out how to nail them.

 

[MrBishop]

Yes, it is possible to have a platonic relationship between the sexes. Happens all the time. So does, "it just happened", which is where you were rapidly approaching. If you disagree, ask yourself this. Would you give your best male friend a full body massage? You're treading in dangerous territory, be careful.

Let me reiterate...yes...I would do this to my best male friend...but most likely would be refused because of the raging homo-phobia in most semi-modern males. Massage need not be sexual.

I dissagree that I was rapidly approaching 'it just happened'. Please understand the depth of pure relationship in the platonic sence. It is as if not ony sex, but gender also were irrelevant.

I led teh discussion wrong....as GF told me via PM, it sounds as if I was bragging. Woohoo...lookit me, I can touch a naked woman while my wife is away.

1) She wasn't naked
2) My wife could've been standing there and it wouldn't have made a difference
3) This is because she understands what a platonic relationship is. To the point where we invited her to move in with us on several occasions. My wife's not dumb, nor blind. Would you invite someone that you felt to be a threat to your relationship to move in with you?

I have known this woman for 8 years. You would think that if 'it just happened' was going to happen, then it woul've happened a long time ago.

I have nothing to fear, neither does my wife, nor my friend.

I don't understand the level of misunderstanding that I'm getting on ehre though. It's almost like a fearful mob ready to 'burn the witch' for heresy. I dared to say "Platonic" and mean it.

Nothing aimed directly at you Gonz. Just blowing hot air, I guess

 

[a13antichrist]

The point is that it's non-sexual...would I be interested. That's moot...who says that I have to be interested in every member of the opposite sex, regardless of how attractive they are to me?

YOU did, by proclaiming yourself that it's such a miracle that you've managed to establish a non-sexual platonic friendship. Relationships like that don't happen when the dude thinks he has to fuck everything he finds attractive. If this is your first such relationship, well maybe you're on the point of "enlightenment"....

This has little to do with any moral obligation to my wife. It also has lettle to do with getting my penis ripped out at age 20, or any such eunich-istic matters. It's a non-sexual relationship... strike that...I lean on my term for a moment (Plato-nic) . Based soley on social/mental contact...consciously.

Actually, if you re-read your reply to gf's post you'll see that you stated precisely that it wouldn't happen due to a desire not to destroy your relationship with your wife.. make up your mind.

No-one's objecting to your use of Platonic. Simply that the way you presented the thread rang more like "I think I can handle not having sex with this woman, hey I might be getting somewhere". Your clarification is accepted, but your point is still not news.

Guys have problems having platonic friends with girls they want to have sex with. THis is because guys are fucked-up retards and, like I said, think they have to prove themselves to the world by fucking as many women as possible. If a woman won't fuck him when he ants to, he'll take that as a blow to his Manhood and will resent that woman to the point that he is unable to remain friends with her.

It only takes the simple realisation that finding someone sexually attractive does not preclude having a non-sexual relationship with her. Just like you thinking she'd make a good nanny for your kids doesn't prevent her from being a great beach-volleyball partner. I am sexually attracted to a lot of my friends. Some of them I do actually have sex with at times, some I don't, but neither doing it nor not doing it has any effect on our friendship. And these are all still platonic relationships.

LIke you said, just because you're a guy, doesn't mean you have to have sex with her. That's rather obvious. The problem arises when men think that finding a woman attractive means they have to WANT to have sex with her, and that if they don't want to have sex with her, they can't have found her attractive. That's total bullshit and is a large part of what stops men being friends with women they're attracted to.

No-one can blame you for thinking it's rare - it IS, but only because so many men are complete retards. Not because it's something that's in any way difficult to establish.

 

[Wacky Nacky]

Woah :| After finding out what a full body massage is, I have to say your wife is one easy going person. I'd flip if my husband was giving or recieving a full body massage from anyone besides me.

 

[greenfreak]

I led teh discussion wrong....as GF told me via PM, it sounds as if I was bragging. Woohoo...lookit me, I can touch a naked woman while my wife is away.

Doesn't the P in PM stand for Private? It was just an honest observation I felt confident I could share with you without sarcasm. If you told me I misunderstood, I would have just given you the benefit of the doubt. I'm just a little taken aback at the difference between your response here and in your PM. Night and day.

1) She wasn't naked
2) My wife could've been standing there and it wouldn't have made a difference
3) This is because she understands what a platonic relationship is. To the point where we invited her to move in with us on several occasions. My wife's not dumb, nor blind. Would you invite someone that you felt to be a threat to your relationship to move in with you?

1) I wasn't aware she wasn't naked. Can you clarify what a full body massage includes--front and back? Does that include breasts and buttocks? Were you naked? I assumed you were both naked because you said you were using oils. I just re-read and you said she used oils on you-my mistake. But you must have been partly naked for that.

2) About the massage or the conversation you were having during the massage? Each of those aspects alone I guess wouldn't be as suprising to me but together, it just sounds like you're doing something wrong. Maybe it's just because I'm more prudish and wouldn't do the same. It's just my opinion. If everyone is fully aware of everything that's going on, I guess there wouldn't be an issue. It's just not for me.

3) If it works for everyone, that's great. I just wouldn't be comfortable with the massages in the first place, nor the conversation about lack of sex. I don't think any woman would be accepting if their spouse was telling anyone that they didn't give their husbands enough sex.

I have known this woman for 8 years. You would think that if 'it just happened' was going to happen, then it woul've happened a long time ago.

I have nothing to fear, neither does my wife, nor my friend.

I don't understand the level of misunderstanding that I'm getting on ehre though. It's almost like a fearful mob ready to 'burn the witch' for heresy. I dared to say "Platonic" and mean it.

Nothing aimed directly at you Gonz. Just blowing hot air, I guess

Others might be trying to pin you to a wall on this but that wasn't my intention. Hence, the PM instead of saying what I said here. Whatever you do is fine, it's just not my bag. Your boundaries of platonic relationships and mine are much different. I think ultimately it's up to the woman to set those boundaries because men will set them out further than a woman might. I'll say it again, if everyone is cool with everything, more power to ya. I just didn't get that impression, that's all.

 

[Raven]

oooo this has gone way over my head *does the over-my-head-woosh! hand motion*

 

[MrBishop]

Woah :| After finding out what a full body massage is, I have to say your wife is one easy going person. I'd flip if my husband was giving or recieving a full body massage from anyone besides me.

It's a term which doesn't mean the same thing to everyone. Don't jump to conclusions

 

[MrBishop]

Actually, if you re-read your reply to gf's post you'll see that you stated precisely that it wouldn't happen due to a desire not to destroy your relationship with your wife.. make up your mind.

.

Actually, I believe that I said
"Me not having sex with my friend has nothing to do with messing up my relationship with my wife, or my son, or my friend for that matter. It's just not a sexual relationship. "

 

[MrBishop]

Doesn't the P in PM stand for Private? It was just an honest observation I felt confident I could share with you without sarcasm. If you told me I misunderstood, I would have just given you the benefit of the doubt. I'm just a little taken aback at the difference between your response here and in your PM. Night and day.



1) I wasn't aware she wasn't naked. Can you clarify what a full body massage includes--front and back? Does that include breasts and buttocks? Were you naked? I assumed you were both naked because you said you were using oils. I just re-read and you said she used oils on you-my mistake. But you must have been partly naked for that.

2) About the massage or the conversation you were having during the massage? Each of those aspects alone I guess wouldn't be as suprising to me but together, it just sounds like you're doing something wrong. Maybe it's just because I'm more prudish and wouldn't do the same. It's just my opinion. If everyone is fully aware of everything that's going on, I guess there wouldn't be an issue. It's just not for me.

3) If it works for everyone, that's great. I just wouldn't be comfortable with the massages in the first place, nor the conversation about lack of sex. I don't think any woman would be accepting if their spouse was telling anyone that they didn't give their husbands enough sex.




Others might be trying to pin you to a wall on this but that wasn't my intention. Hence, the PM instead of saying what I said here. Whatever you do is fine, it's just not my bag. Your boundaries of platonic relationships and mine are much different. I think ultimately it's up to the woman to set those boundaries because men will set them out further than a woman might. I'll say it again, if everyone is cool with everything, more power to ya. I just didn't get that impression, that's all.

1) OK...neither of us was naked. I don't use oils, I use acu-pressure points, and applied force to large muscle groups...it's more of a push than a rub. A full body massage includes face, neck, shouldres, back, lower back, gluteus maximus, upper thighs (back), calves, ankles, feet. Hands, forearms, bicep/tricep, and underarm. For my wife, I include breasts, inner thighs, upper torso, stomach etc...and then I do use oils, and there is nudity. I had my shirt off for my massage because you can't use oils through clothing. Being topless for a man is no big deal..I work without a shirt all summer in my garden. For me, it was a back rub. No butt or anything else.

2) It's way out in the open. I don't keep secrets from my wife...and I'm not horribly prudish, but I do have limits.

3) Those kinds of conversations happen every day. Men constantly complain that they're not gettin' enough...just look at how often the 'fap' smiley is used, and the topics around here, and the highjacked threads.


Thanks for not trying to nail me to a wall. This thread has flown.
Perhaps I shold start following another less serious thread like the one about Racism...ye gads!

PS. Sorry about the no P in PM in this instance. It shall not happen again. Night and day though? Really? Hmmm...

 

[Gonz]

I just calls 'em as I sees 'em. Not implying you did anything wrong but there is a huge number of divorces that started from platonic relationships. The odds are against you.

My wife has male friends & I'm perfectly comfortable with that. If I found out she was giving massages, I'd get peeved. That's getting a little too close & personal. One way to avoid traps is to avoid situations that put one at risk.

 

[Oz]

One way to avoid traps is to avoid situations that put one at risk.

*writes that down for future reference* Hopefully one day I'll remember to read it

This whole convo reminds me of the "foot massage" conversation from Pulp Fiction

 

[MrBishop]

I just calls 'em as I sees 'em. Not implying you did anything wrong but there is a huge number of divorces that started from platonic relationships. The odds are against you.

My wife has male friends & I'm perfectly comfortable with that. If I found out she was giving massages, I'd get peeved. That's getting a little too close & personal. One way to avoid traps is to avoid situations that put one at risk.

I've been divorced...I know a few of the pitfalls involved in failed marriages. Mind you, that one didn't fail because of cheating. I'm a serial-monogamist.

Thanks for the calm input.

 

[a13antichrist]

Actually, I believe that I said
"Me not having sex with my friend has nothing to do with messing up my relationship with my wife, or my son, or my friend for that matter. It's just not a sexual relationship. "

Doesn't look like it to me...

Let me ask you this... If there was a way to have sexual relations with your best friend and to KNOW without a doubt that there would be no repercussions, would you do it?

I guess that would depend on your definition of repurcussions. Sex with her might mess up an otherwise great relationship. I would lose my wife and son... I don't think that any amount of sex is worth that. Point finale.

 

[Luis G]

Corolary: what MrBishop proposed can not be accomplished by most of the population, all the misunderstandings in this thread are the proof of it.

 

[greenfreak]

Harry Burns: You realize of course that we could never be friends. Sally Albright: Why not?
Harry Burns: What I'm saying is - and this is not a come-on in any way, shape or form - is that men and women can't be friends because the sex part always gets in the way.
Sally Albright: That's not true. I have a number of men friends and there is no sex involved.
Harry Burns: No you don't.
Sally Albright: Yes I do.
Harry Burns: No you don't.
Sally Albright: Yes I do.
Harry Burns: You only think you do.
Sally Albright: You say I'm having sex with these men without my knowledge?
Harry Burns: No, what I'm saying is they all WANT to have sex with you.
Sally Albright: They do not!
Harry Burns: Do too.
Sally Albright: They do not.
Harry Burns: Do too.
Sally Albright: How do you know?
Harry Burns: Because no man can be friends with a woman that he finds attractive. He always wants to have sex with her.
Sally Albright: So, you're saying that a man can be friends with a woman he finds unattractive?
Harry Burns: No. You pretty much want to nail 'em too.
Sally Albright: What if THEY don't want to have sex with YOU?
Harry Burns: Doesn't matter because the sex thing is already out there so the friendship is ultimately doomed and that is the end of the story.
Sally Albright: Well, I guess we're not going to be friends then.
Harry Burns: I guess not.
Sally Albright: That's too bad. You were the only person I knew in New York.

......5 years later......

Harry Burns: Would you like to have dinner? ...Just friends.
Sally Albright: I thought you didn't believe men and women could be friends.
Harry Burns: When did I say that?
Sally Albright: On the ride to New York.
Harry Burns: No, no, no, I never said that. ...Yes, that's right, they can't be friends. Unless both of them are involved with other people, then they can. ...This is an amendment to the earlier rule. If the two people are in relationships, the pressure of possible involvement is lifted. ...That doesn't work either, because what happens then is, the person you're involved with can't understand why you need to be friends with the person you're just friends with. Like it means something is missing from the relationship and why do you have to go outside to get it? And when you say "No, no, no it's not true, nothing is missing from the relationship," the person you're involved with then accuses you of being secretly attracted to the person you're just friends with, which you probably are. I mean, come on, who the hell are we kidding, let's face it. Which brings us back to the earlier rule before the amendment, which is men and women can't be friends.

Love that movie.

 

[MrBishop]

......5 years later......





Love that movie.

http://www.otcentral.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=1799

Great movie...thanks for the rminder...now I have to go out and rent it

 

[flavio]

It is possible for a man and a woman to have an entirely platonic relationship for a long period of time

Sure, happens all the time.

A couple questions though for your situation.

1. Is your friend hot?

2. Have you ever imagined, fantasized, dreamt, or otherwise thought about having sex with her?

3. Does your wife specifically know about you massaging this woman's ass and discussing you and your wife's lack of a sex?

4. Why do you and your wife have a lack of sex?