I was both surprised and not surprised at the importance of the sexual part of long-term marriages. On one hand, it would make sense that having a long-term relationship would make sex and sexual activity less important over things like communication, emotional connectedness, etc. Following some economic principles, the law of diminishing marginal utility states that, as each unit of a product is consumed, the value to the consumer of each additional unit of that product decreases. In this instance, sexual activity in a long-term relationship could be seen as less valuable because of the large amounts of previous sexual activity within that relationship.
At the same time, it would also make sense that sexual activity helps keep the emotional and physical connection alive in a relationship, even when conversations or activities become routine. Sexual activity has the potential to continue strengthening the bond between the couple in a way that other relationships do not have.
What do you think? Can sex still be exciting when it has been with the same person for 40 years? Does it need to be, or does it serve a different function at that point?
I think sex can still be exciting when it has been with the same person for 40 years. It also depends on the couple though. Having sex with your spouse, as opposed to having sex with someone who you are not in a relationship with is two different things. In a marriage, sex should be more than just a physical act and the need to satisfy the body. It should also be a way for two people to express the love for each other.
ReplyDelete