Maybe I didn't word it right. Option A does have emotional intimacy, just not what some people call "soul mates." Option A I was thinking of as your typical good marriage that lasts for a lifetime. I didn't at all mean that it had NO emotional intimacy. It has enough for the average person to feel content.

I actually thought more people would go for the warm snugglebunnies over the temporary fireworks.

Suppose you had to choose between two relationships. One would be loving, affectionate, supportive, and stable over the long term (marriage and kids if you wanted), but without absolutely complete emotional intimacy. Just two people who loved each other very much and were committed to each other.

The other would be an incredibly spectacular meeting of the minds and bodies and emotions all rolled up into one experience. Your dream partner in looks, spontaneity, communication, and the kind of sex you never dreamed possible. A love at first sight that never stops sparkling. BUT it would only last for a few years, let's say 4 to 5 tops. Then, even though the love is still there, your paths somehow inevitably diverge and it's over. You might have other relationships afterward, but nothing close to that.

You can only have one. Which one would you choose?