Is romantic attraction has an essentially sexual component?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pag_Hingowa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Pag_Hingowa

Guest
Can you have one without the other?

Is the idea that lust grows into love within a committed relationship and then that lusting toward women outside of that relationship is suddenly something different?

Any thoughts?
 
Pag_Hingowa said:
Can you have one without the other?

Is the idea that lust grows into love within a committed relationship and then that lusting toward women outside of that relationship is suddenly something different?

Any thoughts?
Click to expand...
I recommend Christopher West’s book Theology of the Body for Beginners. Among many other aspects of marriage and the relationship between men and women, he explains that lust is to be avoided, even within marriage.

Lust is not a starting point for love; it’s always to be avoided.

And lust and attraction are not the same thing.
 
Being attracted to someone is different from lusting after someone.

I think the dangerous part is when you are “in lust” with someone and you think it’s love. Especially in this day when people become physically involved before knowing each other properly.

If you aren’t married you shouldn’t be lusting at all.
 
Warandpeace said:
If you aren’t married you shouldn’t be lusting at all.
Click to expand...
Warandpeace, I agree with the first part of your previous comments.

Married people should shun lust as well people who have other states in life. West points this out in his writings and lectures.

It can be a problem within marriage when a spouse approaches his/her partner with lust. Marriage doesn’t legitimize lust.
 
daisybee said:
Warandpeace, I agree with the first part of your previous comments.

Married people should shun lust as well people who have other states in life. West points this out in his writings and lectures.

It can be a problem within marriage when a spouse approaches his/her partner with lust. Marriage doesn’t legitimize lust.
Click to expand...
You’re right.
 
Sonnet 116 is about love in its most ideal form. It is praising the glories of lovers who have come to each other freely, and enter into a relationship based on trust and understanding. The first four lines reveal the poet’s pleasure in love that is constant and strong, and will not “alter when it alteration finds.” The following lines proclaim that true love is indeed an “ever-fix’d mark” which will survive any crisis
 
If romantic love is ideal rather than driven by sexual desire, why don’t 21-year-old males ever fall madly in love with 81-year-old women with powerfully attractive personalities and fascinating intellects?
 
Pag_Hingowa said:
If romantic love is ideal rather than driven by sexual desire, why don’t 21-year-old males ever fall madly in love with 81-year-old women with powerfully attractive personalities and fascinating intellects?
Click to expand...
I’m sure you can work out this question logically for yourself
 
I have fallen love with others without desiring to have sexual relations with them. I think that physical attraction is needed, but not necessarily sexual attraction. But I also have been drawn to people who are not physically attractive. I feel the type of feelings I have with women is asymmetric as being “hot” seems to have been a requirement for them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top