IpAncA Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 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 agree. I can't help but not post but I'm just going to say this and leave. I've been thinking about this lately and maybe that's why some are single or struggle in relationships, they use sex as the foundation and then build. Yes I understand that sex is important in a relationship. However it shouldn't be held like it's someone's first born or be the drive of the relationship. Again just my opinion.
sweetbutcheeky Posted September 17, 2007 Posted September 17, 2007 For myself with the guy I am dating right now, I don't want to have sex until we are in a relationship (until I am his girlfriend and he has asked me but I wanted more time). We have been dating for about 3 weeks or so and have kissed and done some touching, but I also want to find out a little more how he is physically (no including sex), our physical chemistry before getting into a relationship and having sex with him. Though keeps asking me "You will tell me when your ready right?" LOL He says is is fine with waiting until I am ready, so will see how long. (finding out more about him in all aspects, but physical chemistry being one of them)
JamesM Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 It's about compatibility, and sex is just another arena of compatibility within the many dynamics of a relationship. I agree. Maybe I understood you wrong earlier. My point reflects experience also. While we dated, our intimacy was hot and heavy. This was not a reflection on the years as they passed. It has ebbed and flowed. My story is one of a sexless marriage, and while it has improved a lot, I can say that the amount of sex that we had in our dating days is not a good measure of how much we have had in marriage. It shouldn't be a part of marriage. I agree....abstinence should not be a part of marriage, but reality is different. Take pregnancy. The first three months can be nothing but sickness. The last three can be nothing but a huge belly. In both situations, sex is not wanted. Hence, abstinence. Physical reasons can come up....illness is one, broken bones is another. Sex is put on the back burner. And if a terminal illness is present, then sex may never happen again. So, then it can no longer be a measure of love. And hard as it is, the afflicted partner must feel confident that it is not a deal breaker. 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. I agree. I did not mean that you did this. Actually I wanted to know what the women felt about the amount of sex in their evaluation of a guy while dating. 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. Sex is one of the reasons, but the biggest reason is ...money. If I went back to my dating days, I would have some long discussions about money. We are now on the same page, but it took a few years. And it is still our main area of discussion. No, sex is not. Here is a link that gives the reasons for divorce. Slightly off topic...sorry, but it may help you decide how important it is to wait or not wait. http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/35097/top_reasons_people_divorce.html 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 understand where you are coming from, but my experience says that a healthy sexual interest is not necessarily indicative of a sexually fulfilling marriage. So many factors occur in life that are unexpected while dating. Illness, money issues, pregnancies...and outside factors that can change the physical nature of the marriage for awhile. This does not mean that it won't return, but when one is going through the dry spell, it is not always know IF sex will return. This is where everything but sex becomes important. Interesting responses.
Cad Rake Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 Not all dating is in preparation of marriage. And not all dating is even for the purpose of establishing a relationship. Keep that in mind. I think for men the best way to go is date as many women as they can. Tell them all that you're not going to be exclusive until there's a ring on your finger, and that you're looking for a wife eventually but want the best one you can find, and the way to find the best one is to meet and date as many women as you can. This also means that no one woman has absolute control over your sex life. I don't know why anybody would give another person complete say over whether he/she is going to have sex or not. Doesn't make sense to me! It will also make you less desperate on dates. You won't really care whether or not this one will sleep with you tonight, because you have another/others who will sleep with you tomorrow night anyway.
katiesmith1b Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 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? wow, you are like that needle in a haystack, or spinning straw into gold. that one very few and so different than the rest. you kinda guys are so hard to find. it seems as tho all the good ones are gone. i must admit that even my own husband is one of the majority. i dated a guy once that respected my wishes to wait until marriage. after I got married to my now husband, i have learned that same guy has since had 3 different kids all by 3 different girls. he quickly changed, if he ever was truly different at all. but it is amazing to see a man stand up for whats right, it takes a lot. and in a world that is in constant search for an instant gratification, its good to know that there are some men out there that are different than the rest. I think you're an amazing person. your wife is one of the most blessed women on the face of the earth.
Krytellan Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 You guys are trying to make it sound like waiting for marriage or at least a long time for sex is such a highly moral thing to do. Are you serious? What's so moral about that? Waiting to have sex isn't a moral decision, it's a physical one (or *cringe* religious). Is it so moral to wait 2 years to have sex with a girl only to find out that there is something about her in a sexual context that you just can't accept (whatever that may be, use your imagine)? What if you find out she's just not interested in sex? Is that fair to the man waiting? I don't call that moral, I call that a supreme waste of time. Why would I ever want to be put in that position? Why is it so hard to fathom that some men (and more women than you may realize) place high value on sex and the frequency and quality thereof? What makes these people such animals for feeling this way? I bet many of you women who feel this way would be irked to finally marry a man only to find out that he makes 25k a year huh? Be a little less than what you hoped for and would have been nice to know ahead of time, right? Just stop acting so high and mighty for being somebody who can repress their sexuality and wait. Some people can't, and frankly, I can't imagine ever wanting to.
Cad Rake Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 Waiting to have sex isn't a moral decision, it's a physical one I see it as a game, personally. I especially like the women who bang the hell out of all the studly bikers they meet and then once they find a guy who might be considered "marriage material" suddenly they are "good girls" who want to "save themselves" for marriage. That's why I never let them get this far. I let 'em know I'm looking for p00n right off the bat so they don't peg me as a "provider" and start to hold out on me. They'll either do it quickly or say no thanks and I can be on to the next. Any guy who waits for sex is a sucker. Don't marry the town whore, and they're all the town whore
OpenBook Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 Just stop acting so high and mighty for being somebody who can repress their sexuality and wait. Some people can't, and frankly, I can't imagine ever wanting to. Oh, so you think we should just all THROW ourselves down in front of you? Kinda like a "wave" at a concert? Dream on, Sweet Mummy.
Krytellan Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 Oh, so you think we should just all THROW ourselves down in front of you? Kinda like a "wave" at a concert? Dream on, Sweet Mummy. Hmm... I don't really see how statement "A" led to remark "B", but OK.
Trialbyfire Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 You guys are trying to make it sound like waiting for marriage or at least a long time for sex is such a highly moral thing to do. Are you serious? What's so moral about that? Morality or is it a man with some self-restraint who is capable of waiting for what he wants, instead of a boy who has to have his needs met...NOW? Waiting to have sex isn't a moral decision, it's a physical one (or *cringe* religious). Is it so moral to wait 2 years to have sex with a girl only to find out that there is something about her in a sexual context that you just can't accept (whatever that may be, use your imagine)? What if you find out she's just not interested in sex? Is that fair to the man waiting? I don't call that moral, I call that a supreme waste of time. Why would I ever want to be put in that position?Wrong again. I firmly believe in try before you buy. It's naive to believe that you'll be guaranteed sexual compatibility, from a piece of paper. Why is it so hard to fathom that some men (and more women than you may realize) place high value on sex and the frequency and quality thereof? What makes these people such animals for feeling this way? It's not. I'm one of these people but I can wait for something that's worthwhile instead of something meaningless with Tom, Dick or Harry. I bet many of you women who feel this way would be irked to finally marry a man only to find out that he makes 25k a year huh? Be a little less than what you hoped for and would have been nice to know ahead of time, right?Here's some brutal honesty back atcha'. I would never marry a man who only makes $25K/annum. He has to make a very reasonable salary in order to uphold his 50% of the financial commitment. I currently live a lifestyle with my own earnings, which I won't give up to support an underachiever. Just stop acting so high and mighty for being somebody who can repress their sexuality and wait. Some people can't, and frankly, I can't imagine ever wanting to. You're in the place in your life where you're only interested in one thing from women so your statement doesn't suprise me at all.
ahah2322 Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 I see it as a game, personally. I especially like the women who bang the hell out of all the studly bikers they meet and then once they find a guy who might be considered "marriage material" suddenly they are "good girls" who want to "save themselves" for marriage. That's why I never let them get this far. I let 'em know I'm looking for p00n right off the bat so they don't peg me as a "provider" and start to hold out on me. They'll either do it quickly or say no thanks and I can be on to the next. Any guy who waits for sex is a sucker. Don't marry the town whore, and they're all the town whore keep thinking like this cad and all you're gonna get are the ''whores''. it's a self-fulfilling prophecy, that simple. peace!
tanbark813 Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 Morality or is it a man with some self-restraint who is capable of waiting for what he wants, instead of a boy who has to have his needs met...NOW? What if a guy you were dating and really liked said he wasn't going to be emotionally available to you for the first 3 months?
Krytellan Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 What if a guy you were dating and really liked said he wasn't going to be emotionally available to you for the first 3 months? Exactly. You'd be a real dirtbag to break up with him just because he didn't toss his emotions out to every woman at the frop of a hat. TBF: Here's some brutal honesty back atcha'. I would never marry a man who only makes $25K/annum. He has to make a very reasonable salary in order to uphold his 50% of the financial commitment. I currently live a lifestyle with my own earnings, which I won't give up to support an underachiever. Again exactly. How would you feel if you had to be with a guy for 6 months or a year before finding this out. You'd feel like you wasted a bit of time, right? Since you have this financial requirement, you wouldn't want to waste a year with a man who made that much. That's just my point about the woman. Why spend a year in a relationship only to find out later than necessary that, for example, she thought oral sex was disgusting. If you're someone who places a high value on it, Yeah, OK, see ya. There's a year I'll never get back. You're in the place in your life where you're only interested in one thing from women so your statement doesn't suprise me at all. Yes, I know. Desiring sexual compatibility can makes pigs of us all. I really should just get a life... You have all the answers. Now I know.
Trialbyfire Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 What if a guy you were dating and really liked said he wasn't going to be emotionally available to you for the first 3 months? If he was upfront about it, that's okay too. I've dated emotionally unavailable men and have been that way, in conjunction. We've had fun together with no expectations.
Trialbyfire Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 Again exactly. How would you feel if you had to be with a guy for 6 months or a year before finding this out. You'd feel like you wasted a bit of time, right? Since you have this financial requirement, you wouldn't want to waste a year with a man who made that much. That's just my point about the woman. Why spend a year in a relationship only to find out later than necessary that, for example, she thought oral sex was disgusting. If you're someone who places a high value on it, Yeah, OK, see ya. There's a year I'll never get back. So you would drop a woman after six months, because she won't do exactly what you want sexually. Are you so shallow and uncreative you can't find other ways to please each other? Yes, I know. Desiring sexual compatibility can makes pigs of us all. I really should just get a life... It's drive based. I can only speak for myself and if a guy has no self-restraint, he's not a candidate. If a person wants to be that way, that's up to him but he'll strike out with me and that's fine too because realistically speaking, there are plenty of men out there who have more depth to offer.
Krytellan Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 So you would drop a woman after six months, because she won't do exactly what you want sexually. Are you so shallow and uncreative you can't find other ways to please each other? It's part of a bigger picture. If that bigger picture is such that this factor is important or just another straw, yes. I've committed the last 6 years of my life to sexually unsatisfying people so yeah, it's pretty damn important to me. Would it be better for me to bury my head in the sand about it and let it become a problem much later? Been there, not worth it.
Cobra_X30 Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 Again exactly. How would you feel if you had to be with a guy for 6 months or a year before finding this out. You'd feel like you wasted a bit of time, right? Since you have this financial requirement, you wouldn't want to waste a year with a man who made that much. That's just my point about the woman. Why spend a year in a relationship only to find out later than necessary that, for example, she thought oral sex was disgusting. If you're someone who places a high value on it, Yeah, OK, see ya. There's a year I'll never get back. Come on! When Mr. 25k either asks for a ride everywhere or pulls up in his 1980 hoopty she would figure it out! Oh, you need me to pay for dinner again? Why is it I've never seen you wear more than 1 T-shirt? Same thing with "sexual compatability", if you cant figure out whether you have chemistry before you jump in the sack... your definitely missing something. And test drive the car... gimme a break. Car looks great from the outside, you drive it around for a while... then you find the odometers been rolled back... Passenger seat is broke... Funky smell once the air freshener wears off... and some other dudes baggage takes up the whole friggin trunk! Avoid this by learning a little about cars!
Trialbyfire Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 It's part of a bigger picture. If that bigger picture is such that this factor is important or just another straw, yes. I've committed the last 6 years of my life to sexually unsatisfying people so yeah, it's pretty damn important to me. Would it be better for me to bury my head in the sand about it and let it become a problem much later? Been there, not worth it. Were they sexually unsatisfying people or were they emotionally unsatisfying relationships, therefore, the sex suffered because of it?
Cobra_X30 Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 I see it as a game, personally. I especially like the women who bang the hell out of all the studly bikers they meet and then once they find a guy who might be considered "marriage material" suddenly they are "good girls" who want to "save themselves" for marriage. That's why I never let them get this far. I let 'em know I'm looking for p00n right off the bat so they don't peg me as a "provider" and start to hold out on me. They'll either do it quickly or say no thanks and I can be on to the next. Any guy who waits for sex is a sucker. Don't marry the town whore, and they're all the town whore LOL... So true... and yet so wrong all at once! FYI... they aren't ALL ho's. But yeah stay away from the town punchcard!
Krytellan Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 Same thing with "sexual compatability", if you cant figure out whether you have chemistry before you jump in the sack... your definitely missing something. I disagree. I can't comment on your ability to do this, but I have been both suprised and disappointed in my life by the difference between perception and reality in this area. I won't presume to know until I've been there, long enough for the novelty to wear off... that's when it can get ugly.
tanbark813 Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 If he was upfront about it, that's okay too. I've dated emotionally unavailable men and have been that way, in conjunction. We've had fun together with no expectations. If being sexually involved with a man requires a heavy emotional investment on your part then isn't withholding sex as a test--and an inaccurate one at that--being emotionally unavailable?
Trialbyfire Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 If being sexually involved with a man requires a heavy emotional investment on your part then isn't withholding sex as a test--and an inaccurate one at that--being emotionally unavailable? I could turn that argument around on you and ask if sex is part of a man's need to display affection, does this mean a man is "in love" with all his one night stands?
tanbark813 Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 I'll assume dodging the question means, "yes". I could turn that argument around on you and ask if sex is part of a man's need to display affection, does this mean a man is "in love" with all his one night stands? Of course not. Just as when women emotionally connect with, and open up to, a man it doesn't necessarily mean she's "in love" with him. He might just be a good, platonic friend of hers.
Cobra_X30 Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 I disagree. I can't comment on your ability to do this, but I have been both suprised and disappointed in my life by the difference between perception and reality in this area. I won't presume to know until I've been there, long enough for the novelty to wear off... that's when it can get ugly. How old are you? You should know how to pick up on these things by this point in life. Women arent that hard to get.
Cobra_X30 Posted September 18, 2007 Posted September 18, 2007 Of course not. Just as when women emotionally connect with, and open up to, a man it doesn't necessarily mean she's "in love" with him. He might just be a good, platonic friend of hers. Due to physiological and societal situations I dont think your comparison here is completely correct. Men and Women relate to sex in a slightly different way, if you approach the topic like both are the same your going to be dissapointed.
Recommended Posts