Leoni Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 No argument here. At least with myself. But somehow I don't apply the same criteria to men. See, that's interesting. Everyone has a different set of criteria. Some have gender bias, others have large lists of requirements, others have heavy requirements in certain areas but none for promiscuity. It's as you say, subjective per individual choice. Link to post Share on other sites
tanbark813 Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Which is something I can respect for someone else, although I don't agree with it for my personal choice. No big deal. What's your cutoff though? At what number of partners does it become unacceptable in terms of a potential SO? Link to post Share on other sites
Leoni Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 What's your cutoff though? At what number of partners does it become unacceptable in terms of a potential SO? Anything beyond single digits, unless it's the lower double digits, is unacceptable to me. Link to post Share on other sites
tanbark813 Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Anything beyond single digits, unless it's the lower double digits, is unacceptable to me. So do you genuinely believe a person who has slept with 9 people is of good quality and then once they sleep with the 10th they change enough to be unacceptable as a partner? Link to post Share on other sites
underpants Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 So do you genuinely believe a person who has slept with 9 people is of good quality and then once they sleep with the 10th they change enough to be unacceptable as a partner? That one person I posted about had under 10 and you see the loophole he found. Link to post Share on other sites
Saxis Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 To you, perhaps. This is just a fundamental difference in viewpoints: Some people consider sexual experience to be a bad thing while others do not. No, that's not quite it. I don't have a problem with sexual experience. I have a problem with promiscuity. It's a red flag that probably shows some, if not all, of the following: decision making skills, commitment issues, views on intimacy, possibility of STDs Think of it as "risk assessment"..... Link to post Share on other sites
tanbark813 Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 No, that's not quite it. I don't have a problem with sexual experience. I have a problem with promiscuity. It's a red flag that probably shows some, if not all, of the following: decision making skills, commitment issues, views on intimacy, possibility of STDs Think of it as "risk assessment"..... One person's promiscuity is another person's sexual experience. It's just perspective, which was basically my point. Link to post Share on other sites
Leoni Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 So do you genuinely believe a person who has slept with 9 people is of good quality and then once they sleep with the 10th they change enough to be unacceptable as a partner? Not necessarily. It's just easier to cutoff and not bother putting in the effort, knowing there's a higher risk of bust. I'm in no hurry to get into anything with anyone, although if the perfect guy comes along, I suppose it might be worth the effort. As it stands, I'm currently emotionally unavailable which will change in the near future. Link to post Share on other sites
tanbark813 Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Not necessarily. It's just easier to cutoff and not bother putting in the effort, knowing there's a higher risk of bust. I don't see how 1 extra person can make a statistically significant change in the probability of the relationship failing but to each his own. Link to post Share on other sites
Saxis Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 What's your cutoff though? At what number of partners does it become unacceptable in terms of a potential SO? Yeah, as I mentioned before, I think everyone has a "magic number", that is somewhat relative to their own experience. Link to post Share on other sites
Saxis Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 One person's promiscuity is another person's sexual experience. It's just perspective, which was basically my point. Almost, but not exactly. Casual and unrestrained in sexual behaviour. Promiscuity is sexual experience, yes. But you can gain sexual experience without being promiscuous. Link to post Share on other sites
Cobra_X30 Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 One person's promiscuity is another person's sexual experience. It's just perspective, which was basically my point. Good point. So, isnt it important to find someone with the same perspective? Isnt that what creates these issues? When people who have different views on this get together, or when someone changes thier mind about it? Link to post Share on other sites
Leoni Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 I don't see how 1 extra person can make a statistically significant change in the probability of the relationship failing but to each his own. Might I ask why it's so important to you that I change my viewpoint? I won't because those are my standards. unless it's the lower double digits You seem to have missed this response from another one of my posts. Everyone cuts off somewhere. Unless the guy is incredibly irresistible, which is almost impossible, considering my methodology for dating, most will not meet my standards. This doesn't mean they're not the perfect match for someone else. Link to post Share on other sites
EnigmaXOXO Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 In reverse ... how about the individual who married young (perhaps with no past sexual experimentation) ... then hits a major midlife where they decide they’re missing out on something and suddenly wants the opportunity to finally explore that aspect of their sexuality? Over the years, I’ve seen a couple of those stories on this board. Link to post Share on other sites
climbergirl Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 To you, perhaps. This is just a fundamental difference in viewpoints: Some people consider sexual experience to be a bad thing while others do not. I don't think sexual experience as a bad thing. I think that the longer and more comfortable in a relationship you are...the more experimental you become. But I consider myself a bit prudish in that respect, and don't think it reflects as a bad character trait on someone who doesn't think the same way as I do. Just as long as they don't practice their sexual experience on someone else while they're with me. Link to post Share on other sites
Leoni Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 So, isnt it important to find someone with the same perspective? Isnt that what creates these issues? When people who have different views on this get together, or when someone changes thier mind about it? Exactly. Which is what I put in my first post. If it's an issue for you, don't be unrealistic and hope you can handle their past. It's not a sin, to not want to give every Joe or Betty a chance. It's got to be what you want from the beginning, instead of hoping and wishing they'll change or have changed. Link to post Share on other sites
tanbark813 Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Promiscuity is sexual experience, yes. But you can gain sexual experience without being promiscuous. Well now we're just getting into semantics. If we're defining promiscuous as "casual and unrestrained" then that's still different than number of partners. Say person A isn't all that attractive and doesn't get many offers for sex. Let's say they only get 5 offers in their life, the person accepts each one, and they are all ONS. Say person B is approached frequently and gets 200 offers for sex in their life. But let's say they only accept 20 and of they are all relationships of varying length. (Even assuming one year together and one year in between relationships a person could accomplish this from the age of 20 - 60). In terms of "casual and unrestrained", person A would be considered promiscuous while person B would not. Good point. So, isnt it important to find someone with the same perspective? Yes, definitely. Or you just don't discuss numbers. Link to post Share on other sites
Cobra_X30 Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 In reverse ... how about the individual who married young (perhaps with no past sexual experimentation) ... then hits a major midlife where they decide they’re missing out on something and suddenly wants the opportunity to finally explore that aspect of their sexuality? Over the years, I’ve seen a couple of those stories on this board. That's typically a marital issue. If the marriage is happy... lack of experience won't make it unhappy. Link to post Share on other sites
Leoni Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 In reverse ... how about the individual who married young (perhaps with no past sexual experimentation) ... then hits a major midlife where they decide they’re missing out on something and suddenly wants the opportunity to finally explore that aspect of their sexuality? Over the years, I’ve seen a couple of those stories on this board. It's no different than any other risk you're willing to take per relationship. People do change but why get together with someone who's already got a history that you don't agree with. Isn't this a bigger risk and leap of faith? Nothing's to stop someone who was promiscuous, to be faithful for awhile, then revert back to grass roots fundamentals later on in life, due to assorted needs for personal validation during mid-life crisis. Link to post Share on other sites
tanbark813 Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Might I ask why it's so important to you that I change my viewpoint? It's not important to me in the least. I ask because I'm curious about the reasoning behind the perspective. You seem to have missed this response from another one of my posts. I didn't miss it. You can substitute 14 and 15--or whatever your exact cutoff happens to be--for 9 and 10 if you want. The question is essentially the same. Link to post Share on other sites
lindya Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 The person who has fewer sexual partners might just be shyer/less comfortable with new people - and, therefore, feel less inclined to have a one night stand with someone they don't know very well. It doesn't make them a better or worse person than the individual who can form fast connections with a wide variety of people. On the other hand, they would probably want to meet potential partners who think that aspect of their personality does make them better people. Just as the more sexually extraverted person would gravitate towards those who prefer their temperament. We all want someone who particularly values our personal experiences, choices and temperament, but that doesn't justify disrespecting or belittling other people's. Link to post Share on other sites
tanbark813 Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Nothing's to stop someone who was promiscuous, to be faithful for awhile, then revert back to grass roots fundamentals later on in life, due to assorted needs for personal validation during mid-life crisis. Okay, differences in perspective is one thing but the above is just ignorance. I have what I'm sure you would consider to be a promiscuous past, which is fine, but I've never cheated on a gf. Link to post Share on other sites
Leoni Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Okay, differences in perspective is one thing but the above is just ignorance. I have what I'm sure you would consider to be a promiscuous past, which is fine, but I've never cheated on a gf. It's about as realistic as the original post that I was responding to. I've never cheated either. So what? Link to post Share on other sites
Cobra_X30 Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Well now we're just getting into semantics. If we're defining promiscuous as "casual and unrestrained" then that's still different than number of partners. Say person A isn't all that attractive and doesn't get many offers for sex. Let's say they only get 5 offers in their life, the person accepts each one, and they are all ONS. Say person B is approached frequently and gets 200 offers for sex in their life. But let's say they only accept 20 and of they are all relationships of varying length. (Even assuming one year together and one year in between relationships a person could accomplish this from the age of 20 - 60). In terms of "casual and unrestrained", person A would be considered promiscuous while person B would not. Yes, definitely. Or you just don't discuss numbers. I would not link promiscuity and attractiveness in that way... well not for women at least. I'd say discussing numbers is pretty fair for a relationship. Honestly I dont think its a good idea to be very graphic or detailed though. The idea is to make sure both have the same view of what's acceptable. Link to post Share on other sites
tanbark813 Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 I've never cheated either. So what? Number of partners is not closely related to faithfulness. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts