i suppose, but just because i am too lazy right now being that its 4 AM to come up with a valid example with proof doesnt mean it doesnt exist

i can see your point here actually. what you're saying is even though an elderly couple may be past their prime of their "humping years" if you will, that doesn't mean that they don't still love each other even if the sex isn't "up" to standards anymore

does that also mean that they no longer desire? dream of their youthful days? that is as much sex as the act...

how so? i mean, we can say they desire to have sex and that could in a sense be related, but they almost might have desires to....i dunno, eat spicy foods, is that the same as eating?

hmmm...i'm not sure exactly what you mean.

spicy foods dont have much to do with the urge to slambang one of your granddaughter's friends...

Well, now, that's where you are wrong, as the two are inseparable. It is commonly known that spicy food leads elderly people to tap the ass of nearby youngsters, which is why they are fed only oatmeal.

There is an interesting point in that if the desire exists, then in a sense the action has been committed, albeit only within the mind. Often that is enough for people. However, the counter-argument is also valid in that we don't consider the thought of eating to be the same as physically eating, though like the sexual desire has, in a sense, occurred mentally, though may perhaps be less fulfilling.
Now, as we all know, eating and enjoyment of food do not necessarily go hand in hand. Often we can eat food without enjoying it, but is it possible to enjoy food without eating it? In culinary terms, the gastronomic process is really only a small part, though not insignificant. There is, of course, the presentation; the food is pleasing to look at. It could be an artful arrangement, utilizing brilliant color schemes and decorative garnishes. The first bite is with the eyes, I always hear. Not always true, though. Sometimes the scent is first. The aromas of food that is well prepared and craftily seasoned can do much. People cherish certain food smells for their entire lives, and they evoke pleasant memories and instill a sense of well being. Of course, often the sound of the food is very pleasant as well. There are many sounds of cooking that are easily associated with certain foods, their tastes and textures and the experience of the method which produces the sound. People like to know that specific foods are crunchy, or hear the hiss of frying. Sell the sizzle, they always say. Many enjoy these aspects of foods, but not actually ingesting the foods. Perhaps a flavor or texture is unappealing, while the scent reminds them of a happy moment.
I suppose food, after all, can be enjoyed without actually eating it. This does not preclude the desire to eat and the thought of eating, but does suggest that not all enjoyment comes from the eating.

wow......now i;m hungry......think i'll have a corndog

Would you like some chipotle dip?

are you basicall saying, Apostate. that sex can be had with or without love and the same goes for love?

Wow, you're reading a lot into my dissertation on food. You must be one of those types that looks for hidden messages in ice cubes in Coke ads.
But yes, that is basically what I'm saying, and have said earlier. I am of the school of thought that dictates all emotions are merely electro-chemical responses to various stimuli. What responses a person triggers can vary according to the stimuli they offer. Someone may make you feel good and happy, because of their personality and actions, but lack the qualities that invoke a lustful response. This may seem rare, or unattainable to most, but that is an issue concerning their perceptions, needs and ideals. Part of the issue here stems, I believe, from the ideal that our society has developed concerning love and sex. As in we "prove our love" for a person through sex. While it is commonly accepted that sex can be had without love, as evinced through prostitution and the common stereotype of men, our popular society opines that sex is the ultimate expression of love. I find this odd, given that sex is common without love. Are we then declaring we love everyone we have sex with or fantasize about? Or are we feeling that sex is being wasted, as many prudish types claim, on those we do not love? Hefty, for a biological reproduction instinct.

of course, now we have to go on and define love... dammit it all to hell... this happens once a quarter.

well then rogue, what's your definition of love, lol. (this is your cue to say something both profound and funny)

Yes, defining love. That's a fun one, as love appears to be largely relative. I think, though, that the original meaning behind love in this topic is really just a strong emotional attachment. But then strength of emotion is relative as well, dependant on our perceptions and ideals. What one may call love another may refer to as gas. It is interesting to note that the classic signs of love are also fear signs.

Love is very simple... its when you own happiness is dependent on someone elses happiness (AKA, their happiness rates above your own)... though usually this involves some sort of ritual behavior... like necking...

i'll agree with this statement my dear, just remove the dependent, it sounds so needy, however it sounds like you may have it! as long as it's a two way street , it's not love if one person makes another happy and are unhappy themselves, i can't understand how any person can subject themselves to that life...

i know...what a terrible way to live

lol, necking is fun

but not as fun as oral sex