*Sex is non-productive scientifically, an emotion previously and a need presently.*
You want to embark on a casual ‘No Strings Attached Relationship’? What about ‘Friends with Benefits’?
Believe it or not, ‘friends with benefits’ has quite a reputation of being an ideal relationship where people get to have sex with the person without having to deal with any of those pesky obligations associated with being in a romantic partnership. Being emotionally intimate or exclusively committed to each other is never a thought of this concept. Two individuals having higher sexual demands benefiting each other by satisfying sexual demands without any emotional manipulation seems correct to some people than entering a relationship where they have to manipulate feelings just to navigate sex. This not only satisfies their need but also keep them away from commitment issues. It’s a solution which does not harm the society and remains between the two individuals, being their personal choices, they say.
But is it important that what seems correct to a bunch of people might also strike a chord with the rest of the world? Surely not. While some people find this concept easy-going, some find it ‘morally incorrect’.
*Is bringing sex into friendship violating the bond and the term ‘platonic’?*
They say, if talked about intimacy, it would rather be mental to physical. But preferences are as substantial as a sand castle and that’s the reason for the misled youth.
Back then and even now, sex is typically counted as the last base of love. People claim it to be an emotion where they express love and can only be committed when they are in an emotional and romantic partnership with someone. Contradictory to the ‘friends with benefits’ concept, they say that friendship is an emotion and is not supposed to be an intimate bond. Sex in friendship seems to be a violation of a relationship which is purely platonic. It not only increases the demand for intimacy but also increases the number of betrayal in relationship cases. People tend to cheat in relationships with casual friends to satisfy their demand, if their partner disagrees to cast a bond of intimacy in a committed relationship.
But as it goes, what is wrong to some people is not importantly ‘morally incorrect’ to the others.
So what stand do you think is correct? Is ‘friends with benefits’ a new clause or is it a shadow covering the youth?
About the Author:
Voicing the soul through words.