soulseeker Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 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. I just recently had a guy, someone I erroneously considered a true friend, tell me that if all we were going to do was talk, he'd rather paint. We werent even dating!!!!!!!!!!! Are you f-ing kidding me? THIS is why many women are slow to have sex. I really thought I was beginning to know this guy. It was so disheartening to hear this.
tanbark813 Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 This has been going on for almost a year now and I am striclty interested in a relationship. So I am trying to avoid the "friends with benefits" type of situation. In the begining there was a lack of consistency on his part. We would go out....and then I wouldnt hear from him for 3 or 4 weeks. If a bloke has gone a year without makin' a move then you can be sure as the north star the he not be interested! Either that or he's been flogged in the head one too many times! The sooner ye listen to the wisdom o' the Bark, the better off ye be! Arrrrr...
SouthernT Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 If a bloke has gone a year without makin' a move then you can be sure as the north star the he not be interested! Either that or he's been flogged in the head one too many times! The sooner ye listen to the wisdom o' the Bark, the better off ye be! Arrrrr... He's been trying to make a move for the last couple of months now Tan. But not in the way that "I" want him to. He's asking me to come to his house and spend time there. Am I wrong for wanting him to take me out before spending time together in his house? What do you mean by "make a move"? And by the way...HE initiates all contact. I dont call him at all. So if he's not interested, then why doesnt he stop calling after a year especialy if he hasnt gotten sex from me?
SouthernT Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 If a bloke has gone a year without makin' a move then you can be sure as the north star the he not be interested! Either that or he's been flogged in the head one too many times! The sooner ye listen to the wisdom o' the Bark, the better off ye be! Arrrrr... Too Funny by the way.....
tanbark813 Posted September 19, 2007 Posted September 19, 2007 Am I wrong for wanting him to take me out before spending time together in his house? Nay! Such is expected from a bloke wooing a lass! But the reality is, he hasn't! Arrrrr.. What do you mean by "make a move"? Ask you out be fer starters. Or try ta plant one on ye! So if he's not interested, then why doesnt he stop calling after a year especialy if he hasnt gotten sex from me? Maybe the scallywag be repressed and prefers the private company of lads! AH HA HA HAARRR!
halfarock Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 Sex is as important in a relationship as any other aspect. Hell, it's the primary difference between friendship and a relationship. No it isn’t. Sometimes sex is just sex. That you’re having sex with someone doesn’t mean that you’re in a relationship, it doesn’t even mean that you necessarily like them. It just means that you are having sex. The more sex the stronger the bond? Sorry but IMO that's a bunch of crap. What about those who are together with low drives? They can have just as strong of a bond as those who bonk every other night. I know some of you guys don't pitch that...do you? I don’t think that sex is necessarily what causes bonding. It is something else, at least for me. Call it chemistry or whatever but with certain women there is just a connection that comes, or not, irregardless of sex, or not, that causes bonding.
SouthernT Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 No it isn’t. Sometimes sex is just sex. That you’re having sex with someone doesn’t mean that you’re in a relationship, it doesn’t even mean that you necessarily like them. It just means that you are having sex. quote] And then guys wonder why a woman is holding out.....We never have any idea as to what TYPE sex we will end up having with a man. (i.e. relationship sex, friends w/benefits sex, sex just for the sake of sex....) Why do guys have to be so obscure and complicated?
Trialbyfire Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 I just recently had a guy, someone I erroneously considered a true friend, tell me that if all we were going to do was talk, he'd rather paint. We werent even dating!!!!!!!!!!! Are you f-ing kidding me? THIS is why many women are slow to have sex. I really thought I was beginning to know this guy. It was so disheartening to hear this. Did you buy him a paint by numbers kit and tell him to enjoy it?
Cad Rake Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 THIS is why many women are slow to have sex. Well, whatever, sounds like a lot of time wasted on nothing, IMHO. At least the chicks I stress over ARE putting out and have been since the first couple of dates. I never understand why guys stress over chicks who aren't putting out or why chicks stress over guys who aren't... doing whatever it is chicks like. Sounds like he's KINDA interested. Not enough to do much about it. Who cares?
Darkzen Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 No it isn’t. Sometimes sex is just sex. That you’re having sex with someone doesn’t mean that you’re in a relationship, it doesn’t even mean that you necessarily like them. It just means that you are having sex. I don’t think that sex is necessarily what causes bonding. It is something else, at least for me. Call it chemistry or whatever but with certain women there is just a connection that comes, or not, irregardless of sex, or not, that causes bonding. So you're telling me sex isn't a big part of a relationship? Because if you are trying to insinuate that, you may want to do a little research into human behavior. Sex can be just sex, sure. Although what makes the difference between a really good friend and a SO? I'll give you a hint... it rhymes with hex. I'm not saying that it's the only aspect either, but it's a major aspect. If you don't plan to have sex with a SO, why not just be close friends? I don't care what you believe, science has spoken on the subject. When you have sex with someone it produces a chemical that creates an attached to the person. Some people have strong wills and can ignore chemical reactions in their body. Some people can stop smoking cold turkey, that doesn't mean the nicotine doesn't affect them equally as others. It means that they can deal with it easier. Besides, I already mentioned the other types of bonding a couple can experience... sex still creates a bond via chemical reaction. P.S. I'm drunk atm, so if I don't make sense, blame the alcohol.
SouthernT Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 TAN you wrote the following in a old thread of mine and I'm glad that I went back and read through it again. Mabye a woman should focus on whether or not a man has enough RESPECT for her and then she wont have to worry about how soon or how late she has sex with the guy. But how does a man communicate how much respect he has for a woman? This particular guy has said to me "I have alot of respect for you as a woman and I would never try to hurt you". So am I to take that statement at face value and take the risk? TAN this was your list on what makes a you respect a woman.....you said: 1. Intelligence. 2. Honesty. 3. She's never cheated on anyone. 4. Reliability (following through with what she says she'll do, not flaking, etc.) 5. Her position in life (level of education, career path, etc.) 6. She carries herself well (e.g., not an obvious attention whore or the type of girl who seems shady). 7. She seems like a good person. Personally, when she sleeps with me isn't even taken into consideration but I know a lot of guys do include that on the list. Girls like to think that the sex timeline makes or breaks whether or not a guy considers her relationship material but the reality is that it could be that or any of the things listed above (or others as it will, of course, vary from guy to guy). Sometimes girls will sleep with a guy and then not hear from him and they automatically conclude it was because they slept with him that he didn't call. That's a causal fallacy and not necessarily the case. It could be for any number of reasons, or a combination thereof.
Green Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 oh geez we have LS archive research going on. Personaly I wouldnt wait long at all for sex. When some girl says stuff to me like im a virgin, Im going to wait till Im married for sex. Bam I get to work extra hard, and have that sex when I wanted it. No I would not dump a girl for that specificaly but I have gotten myself in trouble with my boldness, one suposed virgin and her friends attacked at a party for a bold comment after she confessed her virginity to me
tanbark813 Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 TAN you wrote the following in a old thread of mine and I'm glad that I went back and read through it again. Mabye a woman should focus on whether or not a man has enough RESPECT for her and then she wont have to worry about how soon or how late she has sex with the guy. But how does a man communicate how much respect he has for a woman? This particular guy has said to me "I have alot of respect for you as a woman and I would never try to hurt you". So am I to take that statement at face value and take the risk? TAN this was your list on what makes a you respect a woman.....you said: 1. Intelligence. 2. Honesty. 3. She's never cheated on anyone. 4. Reliability (following through with what she says she'll do, not flaking, etc.) 5. Her position in life (level of education, career path, etc.) 6. She carries herself well (e.g., not an obvious attention whore or the type of girl who seems shady). 7. She seems like a good person. Personally, when she sleeps with me isn't even taken into consideration but I know a lot of guys do include that on the list. Girls like to think that the sex timeline makes or breaks whether or not a guy considers her relationship material but the reality is that it could be that or any of the things listed above (or others as it will, of course, vary from guy to guy). Sometimes girls will sleep with a guy and then not hear from him and they automatically conclude it was because they slept with him that he didn't call. That's a causal fallacy and not necessarily the case. It could be for any number of reasons, or a combination thereof. I'm not arguing his level of respect for you. He very well could respect you. My point is that if he hasn't made any kind of effort to take you out or kiss you or whatever then he's not interested. I'm not trying to be mean but from your posts it sounds like you're looking for something that isn't there.
halfarock Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 So you're telling me sex isn't a big part of a relationship? Because if you are trying to insinuate that, you may want to do a little research into human behavior. Sex can be just sex, sure. Although what makes the difference between a really good friend and a SO.... I’m looking at it from a different angle. I’ve had sex with women who weren’t my girlfriend and I have sex with my girlfriend, sometimes it gets complicated. Yet, I only bond with, only have a “relationship” with my girlfriend. I also have close relationships, a bond with women who I’ve never had sex with, never had the desire. Likewise, if I am really into a woman, sex is rarely at the top of my list of interest. I find that if I otherwise bond with a woman the sex will be better but not the other way around. I just don’t see sex as being the deciding factor for who I’m going to fall in love with. All women will engage in sex, it is nothing special. And I can wait.
Darkzen Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 I’m looking at it from a different angle. I’ve had sex with women who weren’t my girlfriend and I have sex with my girlfriend, sometimes it gets complicated. Yet, I only bond with, only have a “relationship” with my girlfriend. I also have close relationships, a bond with women who I’ve never had sex with, never had the desire. Likewise, if I am really into a woman, sex is rarely at the top of my list of interest. I find that if I otherwise bond with a woman the sex will be better but not the other way around. I just don’t see sex as being the deciding factor for who I’m going to fall in love with. All women will engage in sex, it is nothing special. And I can wait. So, you're basically saying that, you don't feel that sex is a big factor in a relationship? Without a healthy sex life, a relationship is usually doomed for failure. My point is that why not be really close friends if sex isn't a big factor... logically speaking, I see sex as the primary difference between a friendship and a relationship. Then again, I don't consider many people friends.
JamesM Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 So, you're basically saying that, you don't feel that sex is a big factor in a relationship? Without a healthy sex life, a relationship is usually doomed for failure. My point is that why not be really close friends if sex isn't a big factor... logically speaking, I see sex as the primary difference between a friendship and a relationship. Then again, I don't consider many people friends. First off, I think this is not the question here...the question is there will be no sex, it is how long would you wait? Sex is a big factor in a "relationship," but the question is at what point does it become the DECIDING factor, and I think never. And while sex IS the difference between a "friendship" and a "relationship," while dating sex is not imperative to a relationship. It is no good indicator as to how long the relationship will last. And many, many marriages that are lasting fifty years began with no sex prior to marriage. WHAT!?! Darkzen leaped out of his chair at that point. Let me explain...chill, dude. When sex disappears in a relationship, then something has most likely precipitated it. Usually the relationship deteriorated before that point. Many factors may contribute to a sexless relationship, but hurt feelings, financial struggles, no communication...are many. The lack of sex does not suddenly end it. So, it can be a symptom of a failed relationship, but not the main reason. Unfortunately, most people don't take the time to find out why they are not having sex, they begin focusing on the symptom and demand more..or else. This can lead to an affair, and then the affair becomes the reason the relationship is over. And Darkzen, sex may bring a chemical reaction inside of you, but so do a lot of things. This cannot be a reason why you "need" sex in a relationship. Sex is for expressing love betweeen two people. It is not some experiment in a petri dish. If a guy lays down an ultimatum while dating..."have sex, or I leave," then this is a great measure of what kind of future troubles there will be. But if he says.."I will wait until you are ready," then he has shown that to him, she is more important than some internal chemical reaction. As for science deciding that men should have sex in relationships, I am flabbergasted. This would be a good pickup line..."just practicing for my PhD." Of course, statistics show that relationships that enter too early into sexual relationship are also doomed to fail. So take your pick. Now to the OP... I am guessing that you have decided one way or another what you will do. And truthfully, it was said best earlier. Do what you feel is best for you, and date men who feel as you do. If you are looking for a husband, this will be a good measure of the type who would be a good fit for you. But at the same time, there should be a good sexual tension between you even if it does not lead to intercourse.
SouthernT Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 I'm not arguing his level of respect for you. He very well could respect you. My point is that if he hasn't made any kind of effort to take you out or kiss you or whatever then he's not interested. I'm not trying to be mean but from your posts it sounds like you're looking for something that isn't there. TAN, you're not understanding, He HAS made a few moves and in public. There's plenty of sexual tension there. But it's taken me this long to wrap my head around the idea of being in a place alone with him. He has asked me to come over several times. I am the one that is telling him that I am not ready for one on one time with him because I've explained to him that I dont understand his intentions. Not trying to look for something that isnt there. Just trying my best to make a fully informed decision before I make a decision to become intimate with this man.
Darkzen Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 First off, I think this is not the question here...the question is there will be no sex, it is how long would you wait? Sex is a big factor in a "relationship," but the question is at what point does it become the DECIDING factor, and I think never. And while sex IS the difference between a "friendship" and a "relationship," while dating sex is not imperative to a relationship. It is no good indicator as to how long the relationship will last. And many, many marriages that are lasting fifty years began with no sex prior to marriage. WHAT!?! Darkzen leaped out of his chair at that point. Let me explain...chill, dude. When sex disappears in a relationship, then something has most likely precipitated it. Usually the relationship deteriorated before that point. Many factors may contribute to a sexless relationship, but hurt feelings, financial struggles, no communication...are many. The lack of sex does not suddenly end it. So, it can be a symptom of a failed relationship, but not the main reason. Unfortunately, most people don't take the time to find out why they are not having sex, they begin focusing on the symptom and demand more..or else. This can lead to an affair, and then the affair becomes the reason the relationship is over. And Darkzen, sex may bring a chemical reaction inside of you, but so do a lot of things. This cannot be a reason why you "need" sex in a relationship. Sex is for expressing love betweeen two people. It is not some experiment in a petri dish. If a guy lays down an ultimatum while dating..."have sex, or I leave," then this is a great measure of what kind of future troubles there will be. But if he says.."I will wait until you are ready," then he has shown that to him, she is more important than some internal chemical reaction. As for science deciding that men should have sex in relationships, I am flabbergasted. This would be a good pickup line..."just practicing for my PhD." Of course, statistics show that relationships that enter too early into sexual relationship are also doomed to fail. So take your pick. Now to the OP... I am guessing that you have decided one way or another what you will do. And truthfully, it was said best earlier. Do what you feel is best for you, and date men who feel as you do. If you are looking for a husband, this will be a good measure of the type who would be a good fit for you. But at the same time, there should be a good sexual tension between you even if it does not lead to intercourse. LOL, wow bud. I never said anything about science being the basis of a relationship. I merely stated that it happens. You know, to give a little insight into the whole concept of sex and relationships. You're also dodging my point. Sex is an important piece of the relationship puzzle, correct? So why would you enter a relationship, without knowing as much about it as possible? For example, say that you really dig this girl. Her personality is compatible with yours. You two think very much alike. Both of you have similar interests and hobbies. Hell you even have similar careers. So she wants to wait to have sex and you are ok with it. Now let's say you wait a good 3 months and find out that you're incompatible in bed. You just wasted 3 F-ing months. You can also swap sex with any of the things I mentioned and get a similar result. Relationships are all about compatibility, be it personality, sexual, interests, etc... sure, some aspects can be give and take to make things work. Although, if sex is the area you're incompatible, you might as well be friends FFS. Jumping into a relationship "half-cocked" is stupid and there's nothing you can say to justify it. Sex deserves equal importance, just like all the other aspects of a relationship... most people turn it into something it's not. If a girl isn't interested in being open and honest (which includes sex), why the hell should I want to be with her? What if she neglected to tell you she had 3 kids until after you got married? Having sex is a part of being open with the other person... I'm not saying that she has to let me "hit it" within the first couple dates, but it better be before it becomes a committed relationship. It's all about compatibility, on every level of a relationship. You don't buy a car until taking it for a test drive, do you? Buying a car is a lot less of big decision, then potentially sharing your life with someone. Nice one about the chair too, but try harder, logic rules me not emotion.
SouthernT Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 Sex is an important piece of the relationship puzzle, correct? So why would you enter a relationship, without knowing as much about it as possible? For example, say that you really dig this girl. Her personality is compatible with yours. You two think very much alike. Both of you have similar interests and hobbies. Hell you even have similar careers. So she wants to wait to have sex and you are ok with it. Now let's say you wait a good 3 months and find out that you're incompatible in bed. You just wasted 3 F-ing months. You can also swap sex with any of the things I mentioned and get a similar result. Relationships are all about compatibility, be it personality, sexual, interests, etc... sure, some aspects can be give and take to make things work. Although, if sex is the area you're incompatible, you might as well be friends FFS. Jumping into a relationship "half-cocked" is stupid and there's nothing you can say to justify it. Sex deserves equal importance, just like all the other aspects of a relationship... most people turn it into something it's not. I'm not saying that she has to let me "hit it" within the first couple dates, but it better be before it becomes a committed relationship. It's all about compatibility, on every level of a relationship. You don't buy a car until taking it for a test drive, do you? Buying a car is a lot less of big decision, then potentially sharing your life with someone. Ok....maybe the guy that I'm dealing with is having these exact same thoughts as you..... While I understand exactly what your saying, but don't you think that you are objectifying women in a way? Comparing sex to test driving a car? And dont get me wrong, I've heard guys say this a million times....but the concept still doesnt make sense. Is this an attitude that changes with a man's age? Or is this just the way men think period? What you're saying is this: A woman can not get a committed relationship with a man until he has taken a test drive with her in his bed. Which gives you, the man, the chance to reject the woman after the sex and use that reason, more than likely, as the reason that you don not want a relationship. You say that other elements are just and important and that if any of the other elements are missing that it could possibly be the same outcome. I think the issue here is setting UNREALISTIC expectations. No man or woman is perfect and the person that you may end up settling down with is bound to not have at least ONE of the many things on your list. It works that way for both men and women. Its not far to write a woman/man off because he/she does not meet EVERYTHING on your long list of requirements. I mean....yeah set standards by all means....but don't set them to were it would be impossible for anyone to meet them other than the great creator.
tanbark813 Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 TAN, you're not understanding, He HAS made a few moves and in public. There's plenty of sexual tension there. But it's taken me this long to wrap my head around the idea of being in a place alone with him. He has asked me to come over several times. I am the one that is telling him that I am not ready for one on one time with him because I've explained to him that I dont understand his intentions. Not trying to look for something that isnt there. Just trying my best to make a fully informed decision before I make a decision to become intimate with this man. Well I don't understand because your story keeps changing. First he only wants to hang out in groups. Then he wants to come over but you don't want him to. Now he wants you to come over to his place but you won't. Anyway, you can go over or have him over without having sex. Secondly, if he is asking you out and you keep saying no, then wtf do you expect to happen? It will never get off the ground if you never agree to go out with him. Both of you sound like you have no experience dating.
JamesM Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 LOL, wow bud. I never said anything about science being the basis of a relationship. I merely stated that it happens. You know, to give a little insight into the whole concept of sex and relationships. But when you explain it as a reason as to WHY sex needs to happen early in a relationship, then it appears that sex is a NEED not an expression of love. You're also dodging my point. Sex is an important piece of the relationship puzzle, correct? Actually, no, I am not. And yes it is important. I think where we disagree is if it is important to be jumping into bed within the first few months or dates of a relationship. Commitment is better for compatibility than performance. So why would you enter a relationship, without knowing as much about it as possible? Since you are ruled by logic, then based on that logic, why not have sex on the first date? If sex is bad, the no more dates? Maybe because sex is more than driving a car? Now let's say you wait a good 3 months and find out that you're incompatible in bed. Sex is not some magical thing that either works or doesn't. It can be improved upon by practice. So, incompatibility the first time does not mean that the relationship should be over. Then too much emphasis is being put on the mechanics of sex. If you love the person, then the incopmpatibility can be worked on. BTW, what does "incompatibility" mean to you? Relationships are all about compatibility, be it personality, sexual, interests, etc... sure, some aspects can be give and take to make things work. Although, if sex is the area you're incompatible, you might as well be friends FFS. Yes, it is, but in many areas, the feeling that this is the person I want to spend my life with...this feeling will give you the desire to develop the compatibility. Some areas are not that way. Common interests are one, but again, if I don't like skiing and my lady does, then I can learn to like it. If I have a hard time shopping, then I can develop an interest because I love her. And if we have "sexual incompatibility," then this does not have to be a "ok, we just had bad sex..see ya" type of response. Personally, I am not married to the best kisser that I ever dated, but there is no way that I would ever trade my wife for the one woman that was. Kissing my wife is so much deeper than simply the technique. So, sexual incompatibility should not be the one deciding factor. Jumping into a relationship "half-cocked" is stupid and there's nothing you can say to justify it. Then I won't try. But I also think that dropping a girl because she won't "put out" soon enough is a way to lose someone who may be the best choice for a long term marriage. Sex deserves equal importance, just like all the other aspects of a relationship... most people turn it into something it's not. Actually, most people turn it into a physical activity that has no bearing as an expression of love. We can be physically attracted and physicaly compatible, but our lives may be miserable. But we can have no sex and be great friends and have a great life. Sex in relationships is relative...some need a lot. Some don't. Just because sex happens a lot during dating does not mean that it will happen a lot during marriage. So many factors will change that. So, "knowing" that the two of you are sexually compatible is not enough. It is more important to spend that time prior to marriage learning as much as possible about likes, dislikes, interests, communicating verbally, and future desires/plans. Learning that you are sexually compatible falls way down on the list. If a girl isn't interested in being open and honest (which includes sex), why the hell should I want to be with her? Being open and honest about sex does not necessarily physically doing intercourse. This means that the two of you communicate expectations and desires. This means that you talk about what you like and don't like. This does not mean sexual performance. Too often during dating days there is NOT enough openess about sex. Yes, there is plenty of activity but not enough communication. That is why what seemed to be a good sex dating relationship turns into a low sex marriage. The guy expects sex every chance he gets, the lady figures once a week is enough. Talking would have helped...not performing. What if she neglected to tell you she had 3 kids until after you got married? Then you have not spent enough time communicating. But if she has sex with you...this in no way means that she will keep having sex with you. During dating days, everyone is on their best behavior...even if you are living together. Communication about children and sex is better than having children and having sex. Having sex is a part of being open with the other person... I'm not saying that she has to let me "hit it" within the first couple dates, but it better be before it becomes a committed relationship. Talking about sex is being open with one another. Having sex does not mean you are open with one another. And sex should be part of a commitment...certainly not a REQUIREMENT of commitment. You don't buy a car until taking it for a test drive, do you? No, and you don't have a baby and then give it back if it isn't exactly what you want. The car analogy is wrong on so many points, I won't go there. Some relationships go so much deeper than buying a house or car. Women are not objects nor are they property. They (hopefully) are the person with whom you will spend the rest of your life. When I did a check on statistics regarding cohabitation. premarital sex and divorce....the correlation is not more sex equals less divorce. Many marriages have gone a lifetime with no premarital sex, but many marriages have failed because of no premarital communication.
SouthernT Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 Well I don't understand because your story keeps changing. First he only wants to hang out in groups. Then he wants to come over but you don't want him to. Now he wants you to come over to his place but you won't. Anyway, you can go over or have him over without having sex. Secondly, if he is asking you out and you keep saying no, then wtf do you expect to happen? It will never get off the ground if you never agree to go out with him. Both of you sound like you have no experience dating. Alright. Short and to the point: first 1-8 months--1)Met him after his fresh break up with his fiance. 2)kept taking me out in group settings. 3)No one on one dates. Just hanging out in group evironments. 4)Made no phisical moves. 5) never asked me to come over and spend one on one time Now, within the past 4 months: 1) still invites me out to group settings 2) kisses my cheek and neck.(making his move I guess) 3) now asking me to come over to his house. 4) Contact is JUST NOW becoming more frequent without 3 or 4 week gaps 5) picks me up to hang out at the mall and stuff. Is that really considered a date? 6) I have no problem going to his house but he's asking me to come over at like 10:00 at night. 7) He owns his own real estate company & works ALOT. So, there.....theres all the relevant facts. Tell me if I'm being difficult, or if neither one of us knows what dating is? And you're right, I've never HAD to date until now. Havent been in a relationship in almost two years now(by choice) and the last one lasted 3 years and the one before that, 5 years in college.
SouthernT Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 :oAnd my apologies to the original poster. Not trying to take over this thread, but this thread is so releveant to my current situation.
tanbark813 Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 Well, personally, I wouldn't say you guys are dating. Kisses on the cheek could mean anything. People kiss their mom on the cheek. Kisses on the neck are a little different but you should ignore all that until he tries to kiss you on the mouth, tongue and all. Until then, he hasn't kissed you. The mall may or may not be a date but in this context I'm guessing it's not. It sounds like he's either: A) Not interested in you; just considers you a friend B) Gay C) Something external is making him not want to get involved with anyone - his busy job, mourning the breakup from his fiance, whatever... You do sound like you're a little uptight in terms of respect and intentions. Not to say you shouldn't want respect or good intentions, but loosen up a little. Dating should be casual and fun. You sound like you want the guy to sign a letter of intent and have it notorized before you'll associate with him. Asking you to come over at 10pm I'd normally say is a booty call, but in this case it may just be because he's so busy. Just go over if you're interested. If he tries to bang you and you don't want to, then just leave. What's the big deal? And no offense, but this thread isn't relevant to your situation at all. How are you making him wait for sex? The guy hasn't even tried to kiss you, for chrissake, let alone tried to get in your pants. In conclusion, lighten up and go out with the guy. But until he kisses you or, at the very least, takes you to dinner alone or some other activity that clearly shows interest, this is all just pointless.
SouthernT Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 Well, personally, I wouldn't say you guys are dating. Kisses on the cheek could mean anything. People kiss their mom on the cheek. Kisses on the neck are a little different but you should ignore all that until he tries to kiss you on the mouth, tongue and all. Until then, he hasn't kissed you. The mall may or may not be a date but in this context I'm guessing it's not. It sounds like he's either: A) Not interested in you; just considers you a friend B) Gay C) Something external is making him not want to get involved with anyone - his busy job, mourning the breakup from his fiance, whatever... You do sound like you're a little uptight in terms of respect and intentions. Not to say you shouldn't want respect or good intentions, but loosen up a little. Dating should be casual and fun. You sound like you want the guy to sign a letter of intent and have it notorized before you'll associate with him. Asking you to come over at 10pm I'd normally say is a booty call, but in this case it may just be because he's so busy. Just go over if you're interested. If he tries to bang you and you don't want to, then just leave. What's the big deal? And no offense, but this thread isn't relevant to your situation at all. How are you making him wait for sex? The guy hasn't even tried to kiss you, for chrissake, let alone tried to get in your pants. In conclusion, lighten up and go out with the guy. But until he kisses you or, at the very least, takes you to dinner alone or some other activity that clearly shows interest, this is all just pointless. Thanks for putting it all in perspective Tan.
Recommended Posts