amber1 Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 For example, you are dating a girl and she says she wants to wait to have sex. How long do you wait for her? Do guys have a set time in their minds? Like if she doesn't have sex with you, say after a month, do you dump her? Are you willing to wait as long as it takes if you really like her?
oppath Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 I once dated a girl for more than a month and she wouldn't make out with me...try FIVE...but she'd gladly accept kisses at the end of the night. After that self esteem shattering experience (it was low to begin with), I'd say 8 weeks for sex. The thing is, if I didn't feel like things were progressing sexually, I'd be calling less and scheduling dates further apart too, opposite of the girl likely feeling the need to be in a relationship before sex. So perhaps intercourse I could wait on, but I'd need touching and petting to have occurred at the month mark. For me to progress towards a relationship, things need to be progressing sexually. The reason: sexual chemistry for me is more evident in the foreplay stages than in intercourse. If I received nothing but kissing, I wouldn't really know how compatible we were. If the sexual chemistry without intercourse is good, then I will feel comfortable committing to the relationship. Hard to say though, since I haven't been in this situation. Sex usually comes pretty quick.
Author amber1 Posted September 17, 2007 Author Posted September 17, 2007 Good answer, thanks. Okay I really didn't make myself that clear...I mean how long would you wait for sexual intercourse? Say if you and she had already been physical but just didn't actually have sex? Like if you did everything else?
Cad Rake Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 I mean how long would you wait for sexual intercourse? Well I usually get my women on the internet, so I "pre-qualify" them beforehand and only actually "date" the ones who have indicated they're down with easy sex. So I guess you could in my case, if it doesn't happen on the first "date," there ain't going to be a second one. Most guys it's probably a couple of dates. Some players it's one. Some shmucks who are totally into you can wait months/years until they finally get exasperated and blow up. Totally depends on the guy. This is like a question that a 16 year old would ask. Sorry, just weird. ??
Cobra_X30 Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 Okay I really didn't make myself that clear...I mean how long would you wait for sexual intercourse? Say if you and she had already been physical but just didn't actually have sex? Like if you did everything else? Depends on the girl. Girls that get around have very short windows, but a girl that doesnt... I'm more willing to wait. So, think of it like this... if you come across to him as someone who puts out on date 3... he is going to get frustrated really quick.
JamesM Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 Okay I really didn't make myself that clear...I mean how long would you wait for sexual intercourse? Say if you and she had already been physical but just didn't actually have sex? Like if you did everything else? As long as it takes IF I love her. Since I now have been married for awhile, I realize how little sex really matters in a marriage. (I know, sex does matter...but not as much as we thought when we dated.) I can truthfully say that if we could go back to our dating days, my wish would not be that we could have had more sex....it would be that we could have had a better idea of what issues needed to be talked about regarding our future. Personally, I think that if a guy makes sex an issue concerning how long he will date you, then he is not really into you for the longterm. If he wants you as a friend, companion, wife, and mother of his children...then sex is only a part...not the main course. So, how long would I wait for actual intercourse? All the way until marriage if that is what it took. But that is looking back. If I had to begin dating again (at my age in early 40s), then I would wait as long as it took. But back in my 20s, I would have waited but not as patiently. I am guessing that my opinion won't be reflective of most of the guys you date, but it should be if they want you for a long term relationship.
ahah2322 Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 i've been in a ltr for close to 3 year and we haven't had sex yet. now i feel so silly, we had our first kiss only after 1.5yrs.
Cobra_X30 Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 i've been in a ltr for close to 3 year and we haven't had sex yet. now i feel so silly, we had our first kiss only after 1.5yrs. I'd wait too if I met a girl who was worth it!
Trialbyfire Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 Personally, I think that if a guy makes sex an issue concerning how long he will date you, then he is not really into you for the longterm. I couldn't agree with this more. Get to know the guy first, so he also has the opportunity to view you as a person, instead of solely the object of his hormonal reactions. If he gets mad and/or withdraws, more often than not, his interest is purely physical. Be careful of the ones who tell you they love you quickly and pour it on. It's a technique to get your defenses down.
tanbark813 Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 Personally, I think that if a guy makes sex an issue concerning how long he will date you, then he is not really into you for the longterm. Bullshyt. The longest I waited was 7 weeks. It started to become an issue after about a month because it gets harder and harder to not take personally. But I was definitely interested in her in the long-term. A good sex life is part of a healthy relationship. Edited: And to answer the OP's original question: Up to a month I would be fine, past that it would become an issue. Once it got to three months I would have concerns about the woman having issues with intimacy and would probably end things.
oppath Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 I take it personally too. I wonder if she's not attracted to me, if I somehow suck at seduction. I wonder if her intentions are to wait for me to prove I am interested long term, or if she just views me as some dude to hang out with once a week because she is bored. the biggest thing is I feel she is not attracted to me.
Saxis Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 Not to hijack, but what does everyone think of the Religious "I'm waiting for marriage..." situations? I'm not a religious person, but I really respect that kind of decision. My STBXW had planned on that, but after 8 months of dating, we were just ready. It was the first time for both of us, so it didn't seem that odd to wait that long. When I start dating again, I could wait that long again for the right girl, but some fooling around would be nice just to make sure the chemistry was there.
JamesM Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 Bullshyt. The longest I waited was 7 weeks. It started to become an issue after about a month because it gets harder and harder to not take personally. But I was definitely interested in her in the long-term. A good sex life is part of a healthy relationship. I respect your opinion here. But as can be expected, I disagree. I am referring to actual intercourse not "petting" or physical contact. And what is I think being referred to here is what importance is sex in regards to having a woman whom you love. Waiting a few months for sex with an individual is nothing. Never being with the one whom you love..depressing. And that is why I say as long as it takes. Yes, I think sex in dating is overrated. While I don't believe it is the reason for divorce, I think the weight it is given in dating contributes to many people not taking the time to develop a personal friendship prior to marriage. After marriage, sex will wane off no matter how passionate the couple is. And when a child comes a long, sex takes the back burner. This is when friendships mean more than sex. Dating is a time of developing a friendship and about discovering compatibility. Many have been married because the sexual chemistry was great, and then they discovered that the friendship was not there. And the reverse is also true. So, when while dating, sex becomes a measuring tool as to how the relationship is, it can actually be very misleading. If abstinence is so difficult during dating, it will become an issue during marriage. If sex is an issue during dating, then it will be a problem during marriage. (What if you can physically not have sex?) If sex is necessary to keep a guy, then his focus is not on marriage but pleasure. I think that a guy and a girl do need to realize that the dating days are not about how soon, how much or how good the sex is. It is about discovering whether or not the two of them can live with each other for better or for worse. It involves compatibility on the physical and emotional level. But sex without friendship is disaster. Both are necessary in marriage, but friendship is most important in dating. BTW, do women gauge their men on how well they are sexually prior to marriage or is it a secondary measure? Is sex as a measure a guy thing?
tanbark813 Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 Well, there is a world of difference between a lack of sex for one month after being married for 10 years, and no sex for the initial month of dating. This thread focuses on the latter. If sex is necessary to keep a guy, then his focus is not on marriage but pleasure. I would also have a problem with no kissing for the first month of dating. I would even have a problem if she refused to go to karaoke with me, or if she never laughed at a single one of my jokes. None of these things makes or breaks a relationship, but the lack of one will hinder the relationship as a whole. It doesn't mean that that one issue is what I'm focused on. What if I didn't date a girl because our political views were vastly different to the point of causing too many arguments? Would that mean I am only interested in politics within a relationship? No. It's about compatibility, and sex is just another arena of compatibility within the many dynamics of a relationship. If abstinence is so difficult during dating, it will become an issue during marriage. It shouldn't be a part of marriage. Is sex as a measure a guy thing? Only a fool measures their relationship by how good the sex is. If I measured my relationships by sex then I would still be with a girl who would also be cheating on me and causing more drama than in any other relationship I've been in.
oppath Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 BTW, do women gauge their men on how well they are sexually prior to marriage or is it a secondary measure? Is sex as a measure a guy thing? Yes. Most women want a guy who can sexually satisfy them in bed. That doesn't mean the sex has to be the best ever in a raw way, because part of good, satisfying sex is the intimacy you have with your partner, emotional intimacy. It is rare to have BAD sex with a person you really dig as a person. I'll say it again though...it is usually the foreplay leading up to intercourse that determines sexual chemistry. I suppose if a girl seems loose and free (to ask for what she wants and to enjoy sex) and only lays there like a dead fish during intercourse, that is going to be a problem. Progression towards sex is very important in determining if I want to be someones BF. Sex is enjoyable. It is a way to express intimacy and affection (though not the only way). You can have LOTS of sex with a woman and it doesn't mean the relationship is about sex. It can mean it is about the affection you have for her and intimacy you want to share. A girl who isn't progressing towards putting out...that is a turn off...because it makes me feel like our RELATIONSHIP isn't progressing. I don't want sex to feel like a reward for patient behavior. I don't want it to be part of a barter. I want the woman to desire me, and sometimes, to dominate me. I like women who can initiate sex. Those are things I will need in a relationship, and they are unlikely to occur if she makes me wait for 3-6 months for sex. I'd say a woman who wanted to wait that long, we wouldn't be compatible in that area. If abstinence is so difficult during dating, it will become an issue during marriage. Sex is a big reason marriages end! The lack of sex should not be present during marriage. While sex every day might be a bit much, most good marriages maintain sex 1-2 times a week.
Trialbyfire Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 I don't want sex to feel like a reward for patient behavior. I don't want it to be part of a barter. It's not part of the barter. What it is, is that some women, like myself, tend to invest heavily when we enter into a physical relationship with someone. The last thing I want to do is to invest in someone who's only in it, for physical reasons. Patience is truly a virtue. It proves that the guy is capable of self-restraint, which, in an LTR, can only be beneficial to the relationship. I can't speak for other women but it's not as if I'm not practicing self-restraint and patience on myself, as well...
tanbark813 Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 Patience is truly a virtue. It proves that the guy is capable of self-restraint, which, in an LTR, can only be beneficial to the relationship. He might be banging someone on the side while waiting for you. Tests can't guarantee a risk-free relationship.
Trialbyfire Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 He might be banging someone on the side while waiting for you. Tests can't guarantee a risk-free relationship. No doubt but your gut instinct will tell you, sooner or later. BTDT... I had something similar happen not too long ago. I waited and discovered that it was worth the wait, because physicality was all he wanted.
Krytellan Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 Personally, I think that if a guy makes sex an issue concerning how long he will date you, then he is not really into you for the longterm. If he wants you as a friend, companion, wife, and mother of his children...then sex is only a part...not the main course. I have to completely disagree with this as well. Coming from someone whose last two relationships included a very unhappy sex life, I would not wait more than 2 or 3 months, because that would tell me that an active sex life is not a high priority for the person I'm dating. I have become more selfish in my old age and am no longer willing to commit to someone that does not demonstrate the same "sexual" ideals that I do. And yes, that means actually wanting to have it. Wanting to wait a year to be sure is fine, it just won't happen with me. So, OP, three months would be a stretch but doable. Two months would be far more realistic. Over 3 months would concern me enough to break it off.
oppath Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 It's not part of the barter. What it is, is that some women, like myself, tend to invest heavily when we enter into a physical relationship with someone. The last thing I want to do is to invest in someone who's only in it, for physical reasons. Patience is truly a virtue. It proves that the guy is capable of self-restraint, which, in an LTR, can only be beneficial to the relationship. I can't speak for other women but it's not as if I'm not practicing self-restraint and patience on myself, as well... I understand that completely. I'm not opposed to waiting. What I dislike is ending every date with a 2 second kiss at the door. If a girl wants to wait for us to be in a relationship for sex, I'm down with that, but I need things to be progressing sexually for me too progress towards a relationship, and that includes STEAMY makeouts and plenty of physical affection. I get damn attached to sex myself. If a woman wants to wait for the reasons you described, I am game. But after a while I am going to feel like she isn't attracted to me or isn't interested in a relationship with me if things don't progress. If I've gone out with a woman a bunch of times, I am hopeful for a relationship. Otherwise I break it off after 2-3 dates. If things aren't progressing sexually, and she is taking her time emotionally, I feel like I am just a buddy to her, that I am really an option and she is not that interested, that I will do "for now" and she doesn't want to have sex so she can stay unattached until someone better comes along. So if I go on a dozen dates with someone, yes, I get frustrated at the lack of sex. I feel like I am her option, someone to take her out for good times so she is not bored. I understand committing to a relationship too soon isn't a good idea, but sometimes it takes too long to progress towards that. If all I get is a 2 second kiss at her door each time we go out, I feel like I am her buddy, and I honestly feel she is taking advantage of my time. The gray areas in between that extreme and straight out sex....with each woman, the dynamics will be different. If I like her, after 3 dates I am hooked.
Trialbyfire Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 I understand that completely. I'm not opposed to waiting. What I dislike is ending every date with a 2 second kiss at the door. If a girl wants to wait for us to be in a relationship for sex, I'm down with that, but I need things to be progressing sexually for me too progress towards a relationship, and that includes STEAMY makeouts and plenty of physical affection. I get damn attached to sex myself. If a woman wants to wait for the reasons you described, I am game. But after a while I am going to feel like she isn't attracted to me or isn't interested in a relationship with me if things don't progress. If I've gone out with a woman a bunch of times, I am hopeful for a relationship. Otherwise I break it off after 2-3 dates. If things aren't progressing sexually, and she is taking her time emotionally, I feel like I am just a buddy to her, that I am really an option and she is not that interested, that I will do "for now" and she doesn't want to have sex so she can stay unattached until someone better comes along. So if I go on a dozen dates with someone, yes, I get frustrated at the lack of sex. I feel like I am her option, someone to take her out for good times so she is not bored. I understand committing to a relationship too soon isn't a good idea, but sometimes it takes too long to progress towards that. If all I get is a 2 second kiss at her door each time we go out, I feel like I am her buddy, and I honestly feel she is taking advantage of my time. The gray areas in between that extreme and straight out sex....with each woman, the dynamics will be different. If I like her, after 3 dates I am hooked. What you're saying I can understand. There does have to be some form of progression in a relationship-style dating situation. It's sometimes difficult to separate the dross from the gold so I tend to take a more patient tactic, even if some of the gold gets lost. More times than not though, I find that it's dross.
tanbark813 Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 What you're saying I can understand. There does have to be some form of progression in a relationship-style dating situation. It's sometimes difficult to separate the dross from the gold so I tend to take a more patient tactic, even if some of the gold gets lost. More times than not though, I find that it's dross. You only contributed to this thread so you could eventually use the word "dross". I'm on to you.
Trialbyfire Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 You only contributed to this thread so you could eventually use the word "dross". I'm on to you. It's a great word which never sees the light of day, never gets to shine. So what if I've found a way to support it? I challenge you to find a use for it in another thread. Your response must pertain to the opening post.
a4a Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 I believe I would only allow a dating thing go for 2 weeks.... the guy better put out or get out.
halfarock Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 Dating is a time of developing a friendship and about discovering compatibility. Many have been married because the sexual chemistry was great, and then they discovered that the friendship was not there. And the reverse is also true. So, when while dating, sex becomes a measuring tool as to how the relationship is, it can actually be very misleading. I very much agree with you on this subject. When I was younger, early 20’s I had lots of sex with lots of women but then somewhere along the line I discovered that the ones that I liked best were the ones that were more friend than lover. Nowadays, in my 40’s, the greatest criteria I have for selecting a girlfriend is friendship. With my girlfriend, I think that it was almost 6 months before we were sexually intimate. I was never frustrated or anything because there was just something about hanging out with her that made me so very happy.
Recommended Posts