FrustratedStandards Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 It seems that a man will only take you out to a fancy, classy restaurant or do something romantic only if he is expecting something more serious with you, or if you are already in a relationship. Doesn't romance exist anymore where you don't have to be emotionally involved, but can still enjoy a romantic evening together? Define romance how you will, but for me that means wine, great conversation and maybe even great sex. And I don't want to call the guy the next day, or have him call me and expect a second date. Sometime's I just want real romance without real strings. Does this exist?
silvermercy Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 I don't think the situation you described is actually "romantic". Romance for me at least is more synonymous with emotions, long term commitment and "falling in love". Anything else is closer to "falling in lust" and one-night stands. I don't see how one night stands can be "romantic" if you add an expensive restaurant into the mix. lol From Wiki: Romance is the pleasurable feeling of excitement and mystery associated with love.
Woggle Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 I like casual sex when I am not in a relationship but I do not like to pay a lot for it. I pay a lot when I truly care for a woman. Though I am doing well money does not grow on trees.
snug.bunny Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 Sometime's I just want real romance without real strings. Does this exist? Well, you could always find yourself a really rich guy to wine and dine you, perhaps a high power executive who doesn't have time for a relationship and enjoys a lavish lifestyle, women included, if that's what your into.... I wouldn't really consider that "romantic", there is a lot more to romance than fancy restaurants, great conversation and sex, especially if an emotional connection doesn't accompany it.
EnigmaticClarity Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 Doesn't romance exist anymore where you don't have to be emotionally involved What do you mean by "anymore"--when are you thinking this existed? Romance requires emotional involvement.
phineas Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 She wants Tony Stark or James Bond. Unless they got money to burn or they know their getting some, men don't usually take women to fancy restaurants to kill an evening. They honestly got better things to do than entertain some random with an expensive dinner that isn't going to put out afterword so most men only treat women their currently romantic with.
EnigmaticClarity Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 She wants Tony Stark or James Bond. Yea you're right. The word for this isn't romance--what is it, is there a positive word to describe it? The only terms coming to mind are one-night stand, tryst, womanizer, playboy/player, but those all have negative connotations.
Lonely Ronin Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 The only terms coming to mind are one-night stand, tryst, womanizer, playboy/player, but those all have negative connotations. Philanthropist ?
Author FrustratedStandards Posted February 11, 2012 Author Posted February 11, 2012 (edited) I don't think the situation you described is actually "romantic". Romance for me at least is more synonymous with emotions, long term commitment and "falling in love". Anything else is closer to "falling in lust" and one-night stands. I don't see how one night stands can be "romantic" if you add an expensive restaurant into the mix. lol[/i] It's funny how everyone is focusing on the word "resturant" when I said my definition of romantic was wine, conversation and maybe sex. That could mean hanging out at his apartment sitting on the floor drinking wine and talking. It has nothing to do with money. Well, you could always find yourself a really rich guy to wine and dine you, perhaps a high power executive who doesn't have time for a relationship and enjoys a lavish lifestyle, women included, if that's what your into.... I wouldn't really consider that "romantic", there is a lot more to romance than fancy restaurants, great conversation and sex, especially if an emotional connection doesn't accompany it. Again, everyone is focusing on the money part. What does that tell you about society? When people focus so much on the materialistic part of your question? Hmm.. And yes, I think you can be romantic with someone without being "in love" with someone. I've had it before. A couple years ago this guy and I really hit it off on new years. We ended up doing exactly that, having a few drinks and talking all night. It was so romantic. I haven't heard from him since that night, but I still appreciated his company. This is the only example I have since i've only had this experience once. I wouldn't mind something like that again, but it always seems a man expects something from you in return for being romantic (even if he doesn't spend money on you). Yea you're right. The word for this isn't romance--what is it, is there a positive word to describe it? The only terms coming to mind are one-night stand, tryst, womanizer, playboy/player, but those all have negative connotations. Really? Maybe those were your experiences, but mine were a little more intimate than that, and I enjoyed them. Maybe its the way you see things? Maybe for you casual sex is a "one night stand" or a "womanizer" kind of thing to do, but in my experiences casual sex can be quite satisfying and romantic (depending on the guy). It doesn't necessarily have to be trashy and awkward just because it's with a stranger. Maybe thats why my question seems puzzling to many, because you haven't had an experience like mine so you don't quite understand what I mean by "romantic without strings". Edited February 11, 2012 by FrustratedStandards
Anela Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 There are supposedly top players out there, who will fall in love with you for a night. I don't know if they will wine and dine, though. You could try just making profiles on various dating sites and craigslist, stating exactly what you want.
EnigmaticClarity Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 Maybe those were your experiences, but mine were a little more intimate than that, and I enjoyed them. Maybe its the way you see things? Maybe for you casual sex is a "one night stand" or a "womanizer" kind of thing to do, but in my experiences casual sex can be quite satisfying and romantic (depending on the guy). It doesn't necessarily have to be trashy and awkward just because it's with a stranger. Maybe thats why my question seems puzzling to many, because you haven't had an experience like mine so you don't quite understand what I mean by "romantic without strings". Umm...what? The way I see things doesn't change the societal definition of the word "romance"--which is why i was trying to think of a more positive one to fit the no-strings-attached situations you're describing.
Author FrustratedStandards Posted February 11, 2012 Author Posted February 11, 2012 Umm...what? The way I see things doesn't change the societal definition of the word "romance"--which is why i was trying to think of a more positive one to fit the no-strings-attached situations you're describing. Societal definition. Not mine.
snug.bunny Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 It's funny how everyone is focusing on the word "resturant" when I said my definition of romantic was wine, conversation and maybe sex. That could mean hanging out at his apartment sitting on the floor drinking wine and talking. It has nothing to do with money. Again, everyone is focusing on the money part. What does that tell you about society? When people focus so much on the materialistic part of your question? Hmm.. And yes, I think you can be romantic with someone without being "in love" with someone. I've had it before. A couple years ago this guy and I really hit it off on new years. We ended up doing exactly that, having a few drinks and talking all night. It was so romantic. I haven't heard from him since that night, but I still appreciated his company. This is the only example I have since i've only had this experience once. I wouldn't mind something like that again, but it always seems a man expects something from you in return for being romantic (even if he doesn't spend money on you). Really? Maybe those were your experiences, but mine were a little more intimate than that, and I enjoyed them. Maybe its the way you see things? Maybe for you casual sex is a "one night stand" or a "womanizer" kind of thing to do, but in my experiences casual sex can be quite satisfying and romantic (depending on the guy). It doesn't necessarily have to be trashy and awkward just because it's with a stranger. Maybe thats why my question seems puzzling to many, because you haven't had an experience like mine so you don't quite understand what I mean by "romantic without strings". Money is implied because YOU said fancy/classy restaurant, which basically costs a bit more MONEY as opposed to something less formal. Maybe what you'd like is casual sex, without it feeling "cheap". Casual sex isn't romantic, it's having sex and that's it.
irc333 Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 Can you go for a swim in the water without getting wet? Kind of silly question. It seems that a man will only take you out to a fancy, classy restaurant or do something romantic only if he is expecting something more serious with you, or if you are already in a relationship. Doesn't romance exist anymore where you don't have to be emotionally involved, but can still enjoy a romantic evening together? Define romance how you will, but for me that means wine, great conversation and maybe even great sex. And I don't want to call the guy the next day, or have him call me and expect a second date. Sometime's I just want real romance without real strings. Does this exist?
Mme. Chaucer Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 Define romance how you will, but for me that means wine, great conversation and maybe even great sex. I'm pretty sure you can at least count on having wine and sex without strings attached. There have got to be some takers for that. It doesn't sound exactly romantic, to me … but whatever floats your boat!
soserious1 Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 It seems that a man will only take you out to a fancy, classy restaurant or do something romantic only if he is expecting something more serious with you, or if you are already in a relationship. Doesn't romance exist anymore where you don't have to be emotionally involved, but can still enjoy a romantic evening together? Define romance how you will, but for me that means wine, great conversation and maybe even great sex. And I don't want to call the guy the next day, or have him call me and expect a second date. Sometime's I just want real romance without real strings. Does this exist? Yes, such situations exist... but.. you are going to have to do a lot of the work to get what you want & you're going to have to be willing to foot the bill. I will only have casual " no strings" intimate encounters but like you, find that I regard sex as part of an evening's entertainment, enjoying a nice dinner with a pleasant good humored man, wine & perhaps some good jazz culminating in hot sex at a nice hotel adds up to a night that pleases on several levels. In order to find men seeking the same thing I've had to register at adult OLD sites, I've had to be REALLY specific about what I'm looking for (and what I'm not) in my profile. I'll exchange a couple of emails with a man & then a phone contact ( I keep a pre-paid disposable cell phone just for this) if the man & I click we'll set up a date, I make reservations & pay for the hotel room in advance.Depending on my schedule & what events are happening in my city I might make dinner reservations or snag show tickets which I pay for. Come date night, I go to the hotel after work, check in, place condoms,lube, massage oil & a toy or two in the room If I've made dinner plans, we'll meet at the restaurant or jazz club, if not, we'll meet at the hotel bar, sometimes we'll just have hot apps & drinks before retiring to the room, other times we might have a full dinner at the hotel restaurant, again I pay for everything. I've had some really pleasant, enjoyable evenings, the best encounters have been with men from out of town who come to my city for business. The majority of them are bright, well educated & make interesting dinner companions. The sex has ranged from so,so (man had jet lag coupled with too much scotch) to off the charts hot.
Mme. Chaucer Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 So, OP - are you willing to foot the bill to get what you want?
joystickd Posted February 12, 2012 Posted February 12, 2012 So you could go over to a man's apartment and you saw a bottle of Night Train and Barry White playing. How would you feel?
Mme. Chaucer Posted February 12, 2012 Posted February 12, 2012 So you could go over to a man's apartment and you saw a bottle of Night Train and Barry White playing. How would you feel? Well, the Barry White definitely brings it into the realm of romance. In spite of the Night Train.
Jeremy87 Posted February 12, 2012 Posted February 12, 2012 It seems that a man will only take you out to a fancy, classy restaurant or do something romantic only if he is expecting something more serious with you, or if you are already in a relationship. Doesn't romance exist anymore where you don't have to be emotionally involved, but can still enjoy a romantic evening together? Define romance how you will, but for me that means wine, great conversation and maybe even great sex. And I don't want to call the guy the next day, or have him call me and expect a second date. Sometime's I just want real romance without real strings. Does this exist? Huh??? No strings attached sex is my language.
.thumb.png.baa1266146418e391887630c93d66f5c.png)
Recommended Posts