EnigmaXOXO 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. True. But someone who hasn’t gone through the process of “sewing their wild oats” (so to speak) may present the same risk. For me, it isn’t so much about numbers as it is how someone conducted themselves while in those relationships. I’d feel far less confident with a man who had only three partners ... all of whom who were married to someone else and cheating with him, than a man who had four times as many sexual partners while they were both still single and available. I agree however, it’s totally subjective and based on individual preference. And there’s nothing wrong with being careful and selective! Link to post Share on other sites
DutchGuy Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 I know I'm going to sound like a 13yo girl but, I'd always like to think that I'm special to the person I have sex with. A girl that has had a lot of sexual partners, to me, seems like someone that either doesn't care who she has sex with, or, finds everybody 'special'. Link to post Share on other sites
Saxis 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. That's just what the dictionary threw at me. 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. Exactly why I think the "magic number" moves with your own age and experience. Guess it depends on which definition you use for "casual", too. I wouldn't say Person A is getting offers "from time to time" (one definition of casual). I'd say rarely, and call that desperate. Person B is only sleeping with 1 person every 2 years. By the age of 30, they will have had 5 partners? That's not much, and probably well within the acceptable range of almost anyone. Link to post Share on other sites
Leoni Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Number of partners is not closely related to faithfulness. An ongoing need for external validation is related to faithfulness. If you take a random sampling of say 100 men who are promiscuous, I suspect there would be more than enough of them who are promiscuous for the sake of external validation. Once again, it won't cover everyone, just like the reasons for cheating, don't blanket everyone, but why get involved with someone who's past isn't the type of past that meets your requirements? I don't need to change my views to make anyone else happy. Are you capable of respecting my opinion? I can respect yours. Link to post Share on other sites
tanbark813 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 An ongoing need for external validation is related to faithfulness. This assumes that the person's number of partners is attributed to a need for external validation, which isn't necessarily true. I don't need to change my views to make anyone else happy. Are you capable of respecting my opinion? I can respect yours. I'm not telling you what to think. And I do respect your opinion. I haven't once made a disparaging remark about people with low numbers. You have, however, made several regarding people with high numbers. Link to post Share on other sites
Leoni Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 True. But someone who hasn’t gone through the process of “sewing their wild oats” (so to speak) may present the same risk. For me, it isn’t so much about numbers as it is how someone conducted themselves while in those relationships. I’d feel far less confident with a man who had only three partners ... all of whom who were married to someone else and cheating with him, than a man who had four times as many sexual partners while they were both still single and available. I agree however, it’s totally subjective and based on individual preference. And there’s nothing wrong with being careful and selective! I can easily see where you're coming from but the time it takes to find out if this person is one or the other, might better be spent elsewhere, at least for my preference. Not everyone is the same as I am, if anything most people aren't. I also wouldn't give the time of day to a cheater, so I agree with you there. While they maybe rehabbed, it's not worth the risk to me. Link to post Share on other sites
Cobra_X30 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Number of partners is not closely related to faithfulness. It does relate to how you value your own sexuality. Which does relate to faithfulness. So... I'd say in many cases... your wrong on that. I know I'm going to sound like a 13yo girl but, I'd always like to think that I'm special to the person I have sex with. A girl that has had a lot of sexual partners, to me, seems like someone that either doesn't care who she has sex with, or, finds everybody 'special'. WOW... that is something which has yet to be discussed. Lot's of people are going to write this comment off as your insecurity. I don't think that would be a correct way to view this. Link to post Share on other sites
Leoni Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 This assumes that the person's number of partners is attributed to a need for external validation, which isn't necessarily true. Read my entire post and stop taking sections out, out of context. An ongoing need for external validation is related to faithfulness. If you take a random sampling of say 100 men who are promiscuous, I suspect there would be more than enough of them who are promiscuous for the sake of external validation. Once again, it won't cover everyone, just like the reasons for cheating, don't blanket everyone, but why get involved with someone who's past isn't the type of past that meets your requirements? I'm not telling you what to think. And I do respect your opinion. I haven't once made a disparaging remark about people with low numbers. You have, however, made several regarding people with high numbers. Are you suggesting that what you consider to be disparaging remarks don't fit anyone in the high numbers? Link to post Share on other sites
Stockalone Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I do believe that the number of sexual partners is important as it, like all our past decisions, shape our personality and thus it is another piece of the puzzle that helps me evaluate the other person. That is why I do bring up the number of partners. I found it helpful to determine the level of shared values/morals. It also gives me a hint on whether or not our lifestyles are compatible and what might lie ahead. Link to post Share on other sites
tanbark813 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 It does relate to how you value your own sexuality. Which does relate to faithfulness. So... I'd say in many cases... your wrong on that. Saying I'm wrong doesn't make it so. And from my own personal experience I know I'm not wrong. You must not know my exes. Link to post Share on other sites
tanbark813 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Are you suggesting that what you consider to be disparaging remarks don't fit anyone in the high numbers? That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying they fit some and not others. I'm also saying that they fit some with low numbers and not others. I'm saying that they're not interchangeable. Plenty of people with low numbers seek out external validation as well. It's like saying the sun came out today and my car started, therefore the sun powers my car. Just because two things may occur together, does not mean one caused the other or is a reason for the other to be. Link to post Share on other sites
Saxis Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I know I'm going to sound like a 13yo girl but, I'd always like to think that I'm special to the person I have sex with. A girl that has had a lot of sexual partners, to me, seems like someone that either doesn't care who she they has have sex with, or, finds everybody 'special'. WOW... that is something which has yet to be discussed. That's pretty much what I've been meaning by "poor decision making". If you don't care who you're having sex with, that's really saying a lot about your views on sexuality, and whether they are compatible with mine. Link to post Share on other sites
underpants Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 So how long should someone abstain from sex? Is sex with an ex more acceptable then embarking on a new relationship with someone who might be a better partner then a proven failed one? Link to post Share on other sites
Leoni Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I do believe that the number of sexual partners is important as it, like all our past decisions, shape our personality and thus it is another piece of the puzzle that helps me evaluate the other person. That is why I do bring up the number of partners. I found it helpful to determine the level of shared values/morals. It also gives me a hint on whether or not our lifestyles are compatible and what might lie ahead. Agreed. It's a matter of what everyone values and has for requirements. Find the person who best matches your values and morals, then when progressing through the "get to know each other better phase", it's makes for so many less reasons, to be incompatible about. Either way, there could easily be other reasons for incompatibilities. Maybe he or she is a couch potato and you're an active, athletic person. Link to post Share on other sites
Leoni Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying they fit some and not others. I'm also saying that they fit some with low numbers and not others. I'm saying that they're not interchangeable. Plenty of people with low numbers seek out external validation as well. It's like saying the sun came out today and my car started, therefore the sun powers my car. Just because two things may occur together, does not mean one caused the other or is a reason for the other to be. Enough already! You have your standards and I have mine. There's no right or wrong in this so each one of us can have different opinions. Understood? Link to post Share on other sites
Saxis Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 It's like saying the sun came out today and my car started, therefore the sun powers my car. Just because two things may occur together, does not mean one caused the other or is a reason for the other to be. But if you didn't know otherwise, would you chance it by trying to drive your car in the dark? Not the best analogy.... Link to post Share on other sites
tanbark813 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Enough already! You have your standards and I have mine. There's no right or wrong in this so each one of us can have different opinions. Understood? You would be hard-pressed to present an argument I couldn't understand. And I'll post as often as I like, thanks. Link to post Share on other sites
tanbark813 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 But if you didn't know otherwise, would you chance it by trying to drive your car in the dark? Not the best analogy.... Some of us are more adventurous than others. Link to post Share on other sites
Saxis Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Some of us are more adventurous than others. Hey, as long as the headlights work and I'm able to see where I'm going, it's all good! Link to post Share on other sites
Leoni Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Hey, as long as the headlights work and I'm able to see where I'm going, it's all good! This made me think of that song, One Headlight, by the Wallflowers. Link to post Share on other sites
sally4sara Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I know I'm going to sound like a 13yo girl but, I'd always like to think that I'm special to the person I have sex with. A girl that has had a lot of sexual partners, to me, seems like someone that either doesn't care who she has sex with, or, finds everybody 'special'. I don't see anything wrong with thinking like this. And I don't think it has to be that you are insecure. But both men and women's sex drives change back and forth through out our lives. This happens due to many things like heath issues, age, life circumstances, etc. I'd like to be with someone like myself who feels special for more reasons other than whether or not I was currently having sex with them. I would want my partner to still feel special enough to stay even if I was too sick for a prolonged period to have sex; someone who thought I was special even though I might not be able to give them sex for a while. Your partner should be your best friend. Would you discount someone as a great friend because they had "too many" sex partners in their life? Link to post Share on other sites
Phateless Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 As long as all the tests are clean and we have a genuine connection, I'll trust her to be faithful. Beyond that, what's the big deal? My ex was a virgin when I met her and she is a TERRIBLE lay! I want my next gf to know what she's doing, and as long as the number isn't obscenely high I won't care, as long as she meets my other criteria. The last girl I hooked up with was a rockstar in bed, and I told her so. Oh, what a difference! Link to post Share on other sites
Cobra_X30 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Saying I'm wrong doesn't make it so. And from my own personal experience I know I'm not wrong. You must not know my exes. LOL... your probably just bad at catching them! Do you believe sex without any emotional investment is healthy? Link to post Share on other sites
tanbark813 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 LOL... your probably just bad at catching them! I meant that in the opposite way. The girls who have cheated on me didn't have high numbers (from what I know anyway). Do you believe sex without any emotional investment is healthy? That's a loaded question. I do not believe sex without emotional investment is unhealthy, but sex with emotional investment is certainly much more satisfying. I'm all for sex with emotional investment. Link to post Share on other sites
Leoni Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I found an article which theorizes the correlation between testosterone and cheating, from the American Psychological Association. http://www.apa.org/monitor/dec06/testosterone.html High testosterone levels can also be found in males who lean towards promiscuity. While there's never a set formula for reasons of promiscuity or cheating, you can draw some scientific parallels, based on testosterone levels. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts