posted 8 hours ago with 24,604 notes (via / source)
posted 8 hours ago with 1,006 notes (via / source)

Yeah, you’re right, man. That is enough.

posted 13 hours ago with 1,072 notes (via / source)
#the walking dead


how can lawyers argue without crying 

posted 13 hours ago with 601,870 notes (via / source)






Genuinely curious. Why would someone marry someone that is asexual if they aren’t? I know both can still love each other, but a big part of marriage is having sex with your spouse. This doesn’t make sense.

Honestly, if an asexual woman doesn’t expect their non asexual husband to want sex from them, they’re kinda naive.

There are asexuals, people who are not asexuals but still not very interested in sex and then those who are interested. (and those that could be considered overly interested by some but anyway). In the original post, it was not said whether or not the husband is asexual. And if he isn’t, he might just be someone who loves their spouse and thinks sex is not important in their marriage. The importance of sex varies greatly, saying sex is an important part of marriage does not stand for everyone. I have a few friends who are asexuals and then a few who are not, but they don’t care much for sex and don’t consider it important at all. I think e.g. a relationship between these kinds of people is ideal in their terms of sexuality and sexual desire. I personally think love is a lot more important than sex in a relationship although to me sex is still important. But for a group of my friends, sex is just something that is uninteresting or even unpleasant and they consider other things to be of greater importance. I can’t speak for the original poster but I think people who are asexual can be honest about their thoughts on sex with their partners because they trust them, and their partners accept them for who they are. And like I said, some people might not consider themselves to be asexuals but they may in fact love their spouse and accept their relationship as it is and know what they’re “getting themselves into” since they respect their spouse and want to be with them regardless and might not that interested in sex themselves.

Well, I can respect the opinion, but I don’t think it applies here. The op makes it sound like the husband is interested in sex, while the wife is not due to her asexuality. I can see how some relationships may not rely on sex, but if one of the spouses is even a little interested in sex, and the other is not, it’s going to be a problem eventually.

I know people would like to think love can overcome that, but the truth is love isn’t some impenetrable force that runs on solar energy. Love needs work to continue existing from both partners. That’s why there’s so many failed relationships. People aren’t willing to put in the effort.

I agree it might be a problem if it’s something an asexual spouse has kept from their spouse. Then I think it’s unfair and naive to presume they will stay in said relationship. Being honest about it from the start may result in a good relationship where the other partner understands that sex is not part of the picture and has regardless made his choice to enter the relationship. (and I think the OP’s situation is like this)

I did not say love is some impenetrable force or that it can overcome anything. What I meant is that some people just don’t think sex is as important as love, so relationships can still work without sex. I did not say love can overcome any “problems”, like overcome the lack of sex when the other partner wants it. Because I don’t think it will, unless in rare cases. But like you said, love is not some incredible thing that will keep people together and it needs work. BUT, sex is only one of the things that can make love better or worse. In some cases sex is the last thing a couple with problems should concentrate on!

posted 22 hours ago with 2,829 notes (via / source)