Chrome Barracuda Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 Doggy style doesn't provide any direct contact with her clitoris....and I think if you ask most women, and I certainly can't speak for them, they don't like doggie style as much...and for that reason plus a lack of intimacy. They want to see your face. There is a way to look in a woman's eyes while she's taking backshots but your gonna have to be at an strange angle and she has to turn her head 90 degrees. lol. Oh trust me SC, I gave and she received and she looked me in the eyes while doing it. So it was intimacy. I dont know what kind of boring vanilla sex your having but, you need to stretch more.
DanielMadr Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 Whew, glad to hear that intelligent guys aren't threatened by this because those are the types of men I find incredibly sexy. The ones that are comfortable with their own intelligence, enough that they don't need to use mysogynistic aka player patter, in their attempts to dominate women. Intelligence capabilities is only a tiny bit of personality. Other traits make it to something useful and attractive. 'I've heard of women falling in love with man who heeled them but never heard of woman falling in love b/c of books.' - Monkey Smith in A Man from the East movie You are the Nerd dream then:D Mysoginists dominate (trying to with no outcome thats the core of their problem btw - you are naturally more dominant personality or you are an azzhole) and Players seduce (they trigger only an initial attaction and then eject unable or not wanting to continue btw).
Salicious Crumb Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 There is a way to look in a woman's eyes while she's taking backshots but your gonna have to be at an strange angle and she has to turn her head 90 degrees. lol. Oh trust me SC, I gave and she received and she looked me in the eyes while doing it. So it was intimacy. I dont know what kind of boring vanilla sex your having but, you need to stretch more. Oh I'm not saying I don't do the doggie style thing...but every woman I've ever been with likes that frontal body contact. One woman told me she isn't an animal and doesn't like it doggie.
Author SouthernT Posted April 24, 2007 Author Posted April 24, 2007 You date guys, you find unattractive? I dont thunk so. We can debate what part of attractivness is more important for men like personality or looks. For the record....its looks in ratio approx. 7:3 . When he doesnt want to date you....he thinks you are not pretty enough FOR HIS PERSONAL TASTE or he things you are too bitchy or he has some major issues like testicles made of teflon or whatever. Bottom line is he doesnt find you attractive enough ro date you. He can find you attractive enough to shag you though. And thats a situation of hit and run. Yeah that is called confusing behaviour. You have no boyfriend then but a little CUDDLE-BIaTCH. In my experience when a girl is that confusing, its better to move on, b/c a guy ends up in two categories: 1) 'All he want is sex' 2) 'Why doesnt he want to have sex with me?' That girl doesnt know what she wants and yet she wants to keep a control. Its like Alabama redneck driving a car in Shanghai. Why is it that you find it so hard to understand women do not tend to have sex with a man until she feels comfortable with him? Until she knows a few things about him and his personality? Whats so confusing about wanting to know a man before allowing him to take us to bed? No we dont have to know your entire life story, but it DOES take more than just a couple of hours spent together at dinner. That is not confusing. Its very simple. Black and white. Men just want to go against the grain and jump straight in bed. And if a guy gets frustrated to a point where he gives up and doesnt even want sex and walks away....then that proves my point. All he wanted was sex from the begining.
Chrome Barracuda Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 Oh I'm not saying I don't do the doggie style thing...but every woman I've ever been with likes that frontal body contact. One woman told me she isn't an animal and doesn't like it doggie. Damn what kind of women you be dealing with, there aint nothing wrong with a lil doggiestyle. you be dealing with a bunch of prude's. lol. Doggoe is not just an animal sexual act, please. In the front it can be just as animalistic under the right circumstances and heat of the moment. oh and to southern T: Women trade sex for love and emotions, men trade love and emotions for sex. If your not getting any on either side you can leave. A man might not just be interested in sex but if he isnt getting his needs met then what's the point? Cant wait forever.
tanbark813 Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 Men just want to go against the grain and jump straight in bed. It's only against the grain in your opinion. There's no right answer to when to sleep with someone whether it be on the first date, after a month, or after 3 months. People have their preferences but there can't really be an "against the grain" because there's no one correct procedure. And if a guy gets frustrated to a point where he gives up and doesnt even want sex and walks away....then that proves my point. All he wanted was sex from the begining. If he walks away after being turned down on the first date, then yeah. But if you're talking after months, then no. He may very well want a meaningful relationship but everyone has their limit to how much rejection they'll take. And ironically, if a guy ONLY wants sex he'll stick around longer than a guy that wants a relationship because sex is more motivating a factor in the former than the latter.
DanielMadr Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 And ironically, if a guy ONLY wants sex he'll stick around longer than a guy that wants a relationship because sex is more motivating a factor in the former than the latter. Good point. When we want to date a girl we are more picky in terms of character etc.
tanbark813 Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 Good point. When we want to date a girl we are more picky in terms of character etc. Yes, very much so.
nicki Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 Yeah, some "player" type guys will wait a long time, while a "good" guy may wait a long time, but bail sooner because he feels rejected and unsure the woman wants him. The "player" guy knows this, and can better manipulate the woman. And how is the woman to know? Therefore, a woman doesn't really get to know a guy for quite a while. That's why I don't play the "sex" card. Have sex when you want to, and not a minute before. Make it a non-issue and becomes a sweet, hot and natural part of the relationship. Sex doesn't equal a promise. Relationships are always a risk, but many people mistake the sex part for the risk. The real risk is that we gamble on whether the guy is who we think he is, or is someone who is manipulating us -- and therefore, a bad guy without real character. So, many women wait hoping to get a clear picture of the guy. Trust and feeling comfortable are essential elements for a woman to have sex with a guy. Extending that feeling out over time is dependent upon whether the two people continue with trust and feeling comfortable with each other. But, at some point, both parties know they are taking a risk on the other person. Sex doesn't guarantee the other person's character at all, so I don't pin all my hopes on that.
DanielMadr Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 Why is it that you find it so hard to understand women do not tend to have sex with a man until she feels comfortable with him? Until she knows a few things about him and his personality? Whats so confusing about wanting to know a man before allowing him to take us to bed? No we dont have to know your entire life story, but it DOES take more than just a couple of hours spent together at dinner. That is not confusing. Its very simple. Black and white. Men just want to go against the grain and jump straight in bed. And if a guy gets frustrated to a point where he gives up and doesnt even want sex and walks away....then that proves my point. All he wanted was sex from the begining. Everyone understands that. You are the only one who dont understand that the problem is somewhere else. Problem is your attitude. You should focus on knowing a guy not on testing him if he is 'after sex only', b/c that gives you attitude of prejudice and accusing. Its like a guy doing dating with attitude of 'Is she after my money?'. Confusing is when you are OK with cuddling and kissing and making out(whatever it is) but then suddenly backs off without proper explanation or when you are cold towards a guy also without proper explanation. It tells him he is dating a taker or emotional baggage or attention wh0re. You can take 2 steps forward and one step back max. Take two steps forward and then 6 steps back and you are confusing him. Yes guys generaly have no problem jumping straight in a bed. We also understand it is not very common, especially if a girl sees us as relationship material (want to date us). Its reality and I dont see anything bad about it. If you have some trust issues, so find a guy who you can trust or make your screening process less heavy or more fun. B/c if you are looking for unconditional asexual love like your parents gave you, then you will need to get a child or a dog. Just get rid of that attitude. It repels guys who are for more than to get to your pants only.
tanbark813 Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 Yeah, some "player" type guys will wait a long time, while a "good" guy may wait a long time, but bail sooner because he feels rejected and unsure the woman wants him. The "player" guy knows this, and can better manipulate the woman. And how is the woman to know? Very true. A guy who is only after sex isn't going to be nearly as emotionally invested--if at all--as a guy who wants more.
Author SouthernT Posted April 24, 2007 Author Posted April 24, 2007 Sex doesn't equal a promise. Relationships are always a risk, but many people mistake the sex part for the risk. The real risk is that we gamble on whether the guy is who we think he is, or is someone who is manipulating us -- and therefore, a bad guy without real character. So, many women wait hoping to get a clear picture of the guy. But, at some point, both parties know they are taking a risk on the other person. Sex doesn't guarantee the other person's character at all, so I don't pin all my hopes on that. I think this is EXACTLY where I went wrong with this guy. I am concentrating more on the risk of having sex with him. Instead of looking at the over all relationship as a risk and realizing that there are no [sIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]guarantees. I think women want the gaurantee of having a relationship as a result of having sex. So we try to find other ways to "play the game" (i.e. holding the sex card)[/FONT][/sIZE]
Author SouthernT Posted April 24, 2007 Author Posted April 24, 2007 It's only against the grain in your opinion. There's no right answer to when to sleep with someone whether it be on the first date, after a month, or after 3 months. People have their preferences but there can't really be an "against the grain" because there's no one correct procedure. If he walks away after being turned down on the first date, then yeah. But if you're talking after months, then no. He may very well want a meaningful relationship but everyone has their limit to how much rejection they'll take. And ironically, if a guy ONLY wants sex he'll stick around longer than a guy that wants a relationship because sex is more motivating a factor in the former than the latter. I dont understand why rejecting a guy for sex after about a month or two, why does it mean that we are rejecting that guy overall period? Those two things do not equate to me.
Author SouthernT Posted April 24, 2007 Author Posted April 24, 2007 Very true. A guy who is only after sex isn't going to be nearly as emotionally invested--if at all--as a guy who wants more. And how does a girl know if a man is emotionally invested? Is this something that only time can tell?
tanbark813 Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 I dont understand why rejecting a guy for sex after about a month or two, why does it mean that we are rejecting that guy overall period? Those two things do not equate to me. I never said it meant you're rejecting him overall, but it's still a form of rejection. You're telling me that if you fell for a guy and wanted to have sex with him and he turned you down for a month or two it wouldn't bother you at all? Please.. And how does a girl know if a man is emotionally invested? Is this something that only time can tell? There's no one answer for this. Time may or may not help. If the guy is just playing you it's easy to keep that up for a long time. A better method--that works for both guys and girls--is looking to see if their actions match their words. Paying attention to the little things helps too. It's easy to fake the big stuff but the little things are often overlooked if a person is not being genuine. Also, I think nicki has a good attitude. It's impossible to have a relationship that's risk-free so just do what you want when you want and don't worry so much. Enjoy it for what it is.
Trialbyfire Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 Intelligence capabilities is only a tiny bit of personality. Other traits make it to something useful and attractive. 'I've heard of women falling in love with man who heeled them but never heard of woman falling in love b/c of books.' - Monkey Smith in A Man from the East movie You are the Nerd dream then:D Mysoginists dominate (trying to with no outcome thats the core of their problem btw - you are naturally more dominant personality or you are an azzhole) and Players seduce (they trigger only an initial attaction and then eject unable or not wanting to continue btw). Again, we disagee. Intelligence is very important to me because I get bored very easily. If there's no challenge and I don't mean the getting part, but mental challenge of someone who can hold his own with skills in a diverse conversation, I drift away. I suppose if you're the type of person who is always looking for a quick fix or short-term physical relationship, it won't matter much. Players seduce but only for short-term gains. There's a strong element of dislike or lack of respect for women, in a player. Otherwise, why would they continue stringing multiple women along, knowing they're hurting them? Many of the women on LS have been victimized by Players. They weren't played because the Player was concerned for their well-being. It was for selfish pleasure, with strong elements of control and disdain for women. The only difference between a player and a mysogynist is that the mysogynist is overtly rather than covertly, disdainful.
Trialbyfire Posted April 25, 2007 Posted April 25, 2007 Ouch. While I can be moved by powerful messages, one pushed to the core like that would hurt me to the quick.
Rewind Posted April 25, 2007 Posted April 25, 2007 I still don't get how women 20, 30, 40 have still not figured out that the way to get a men in a relationship is not by spreading your legs on the first or 2nd date.
Trialbyfire Posted April 25, 2007 Posted April 25, 2007 I still don't get how women 20, 30, 40 have still not figured out that the way to get a men in a relationship is not by spreading your legs on the first or 2nd date. I hope you don't think that withholding sex is a good tool to "catch" a man...
Rewind Posted April 25, 2007 Posted April 25, 2007 I hope you don't think that withholding sex is a good tool to "catch" a man... who said anything about holding sex..but its the same women who boohoo and wine over not hearing back from guys after they banged them the first night. Really though if I was a guy I wouldn't waste my time. Are you going to combust into flames if you don't put out after knowing someone for what 2 hrs lol. If you're both just in it for the sex then hey go ahead.
Trialbyfire Posted April 25, 2007 Posted April 25, 2007 who said anything about holding sex..but its the same women who boohoo and wine over not hearing back from guys after they banged them the first night. Really though if I was a guy I wouldn't waste my time. Are you going to combust into flames if you don't put out after knowing someone for what 2 hrs lol. If you're both just in it for the sex then hey go ahead. Not everyone views sex as a tool or for that matter, a big deal. Some get the itch so they scratch it. While this isn't my composition, it's not up to you or I to define what's good for someone else. The part I don't understand is this "getting a man into a relationship" thing. Men are not objects to be captured. They are people who have wants, needs and desires, like you and I.
Rewind Posted April 25, 2007 Posted April 25, 2007 Not everyone views sex as a tool or for that matter, a big deal. Some get the itch so they scratch it. While this isn't my composition, it's not up to you or I to define what's good for someone else. The part I don't understand is this "getting a man into a relationship" thing. Men are not objects to be captured. They are people who have wants, needs and desires, like you and I. All along I thought they were robots lol. Of course it's not my decision but but the reason I say this is bc I've been surrouned by women, friends included, who have sex with guys right away then never hear from the guys, or they build imaginary relationships in their head with these guys. And then their friends, me included, are the ones they run to complaining and wining about how he hasn't called. After a while you begin to wonder how some can be so naive or like you said they just had the itch so they wanted to scratch it. In that case these people have no reason to complain and waste other peoples times complaining about it to.
Salicious Crumb Posted April 25, 2007 Posted April 25, 2007 I hope you don't think that withholding sex is a good tool to "catch" a man... Well I understand it on both sides. Its a double-edged sword for women. On one hand, if they are promiscuous from the very start, and the guy turns out to be a player...she played right into the jerks hands. On the other...if they withhold sex thinking that will land them a good man who is willing to wait...the man who is truly interested in her might think to himself, "what is wrong with me...is she not into me or repulsed by me?" So the situation sucks to say the least on what to do.
Author SouthernT Posted April 25, 2007 Author Posted April 25, 2007 Not everyone views sex as a tool or for that matter, a big deal. Some get the itch so they scratch it. While this isn't my composition, it's not up to you or I to define what's good for someone else. The part I don't understand is this "getting a man into a relationship" thing. Men are not objects to be captured. They are people who have wants, needs and desires, like you and I. While I completely understand what you are saying here Trial, I do not totally agree. Because I think everybody is talking about two seperate issues. I think what Rewind is trying to say is that for the ladies out there who DO want a relationship, sex should not be part of the approach early on. It has nothing to do with concerntrating on trying to "trap" a man. It has to do with a woman saying to herself "I want a satisfying relationship to be my outcome and to ADD TO my life." And just like any goal in life, you set your goal and then you put together the "appropriate proceedures" or "game plan" (whatever you want to call it...) to obtain the desired result. And if you desired result are to have a man respect you and see you as "girlfriend" material, then you have to act accordingly in the begining stages. Now on the other hand, yes women do have an "itch" that needs to be scratched every once in a while. And there's nothing wrong with that as long as she is facing the reality of her actions and what the outcome will be. i.e.....she can't be mad if she never hears from that guy again if she put out in the first couple of dates. How can she expect the guy to take her seriously if she does not take herself seriously? People will only repsect you as much as you repsect yourself. YES women do have the right to have their needs fulfilled, but unfortunatley, this double standard will ALWAYS exist in the dating world.
Recommended Posts