Untouchable_Fire Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 There are all types of sex. From mere physical attraction to emotional bonding. Sometimes you make seek one, sometimes another. What the heck is the big deal? That is called the prostitute argument. The idea that sex is meaningless and has no emotional or physical impact on us. Personally, I have seen and experienced the opposite, so I respectfully disagree. Who and when you choose to sleep with someone not only says something about you, but also effects your future actions and choices.
Author movingonandon Posted December 1, 2008 Author Posted December 1, 2008 I guess the big thing would be sleeping with a guy before knowing if he sees you as relationship material or not and losing your self-respect when he leaves after he got what he wanted. Rather than being worried about being SEEN as a "ho," it's important not to BE one. This worldview really bugs me... You are (supposedly) a reasonable woman with a head on her shoulders. Why would you lose self respect if I guy lost interest after sleeping with you? More importantly - how NOT sleeping with him for a certain period of time going to change anything about the way he feels about you? All of a sudden you're somehow abused/deceived just because yo uhad sex???? Did he force you to have sex? Continuing to treat sex as "token" that only a few chosen are to be given (rather as an expression of what you want) signifies repression, not "values". I would think that if a woman has sex with me it is because she likes me, not because she has some grand master plan in her head of how things should go - which apparently you do
marlena Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 I do agree with what Movingonandon said, If we like a girl we like her, sex or not. If we don't like her holding out sex is not going to change that. Aye, there's the rub!!!
Untouchable_Fire Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 Geez where were you when I was young and naive and rushing into things? You could have changed my life. I was busy being young and naive! Back then my selection criteria was nearly 100% looks. I asked myself... Is she hot? That's it. I have some horror stories. Shoot, back then I thought a size 2 was too fat. Now, that I am older... I find beauty is not a physical characteristic.
manugeorge Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 That is called the prostitute argument. The idea that sex is meaningless and has no emotional or physical impact on us. Personally, I have seen and experienced the opposite, so I respectfully disagree. Who and when you choose to sleep with someone not only says something about you, but also effects your future actions and choices. And your argument is a judgemental one. Just because you experienced something to the contrary doesn't mean everyone else will. Some people do experience sex as just something to do, fun, frivolous, 5 second orgasm, and that is it. Sex doesn't always equal emotional connection, sometimes, sex is just sex. Sure, our society has raised us to view sex in puritanical ways but at the end of the day, we are mere animals and stripped of societal restrictions, we will engage in sexual activity just like animals at the zoo. Jizz and walk away..pardon my french. While I'm in the category of folks who choose to wait, I also realize that that is a personal decision, I wouldn't hold others to the same standards.
Untouchable_Fire Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 This worldview really bugs me... You are (supposedly) a reasonable woman with a head on her shoulders. Why would you lose self respect if I guy lost interest after sleeping with you? More importantly - how NOT sleeping with him for a certain period of time going to change anything about the way he feels about you? All of a sudden you're somehow abused/deceived just because yo uhad sex???? Did he force you to have sex? Continuing to treat sex as "token" that only a few chosen are to be given (rather as an expression of what you want) signifies repression, not "values". It's called rejection. When you really like somebody, have sex with them... and they move on to someone else. You feel rejected. That's natural. The more intimate you get with them... the greater the feeling of rejection. It's not treating sex as a token. Those who do that... do it both ways!!! They give and withhold to get what they want. Asking another person to wait... is like asking for a show of good faith.
Untouchable_Fire Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 And your argument is a judgemental one. Just because you experienced something to the contrary doesn't mean everyone else will. Some people do experience sex as just something to do, fun, frivolous, 5 second orgasm, and that is it. Sure, our society has raised us to view sex in puritanical ways but at the end of the day, we are mere animals and stripped of societal restrictions, we will engage in sexual activity just like animals at the zoo. Jizz and walk away..pardon my french. Of course it's judgemental. So is saying that we are all just animals. I would argue that our society is less puritanical than it is natural. It's within our nature to view sex as a big deal. Why? Because of the consequences. Condoms and birth control pills don't grow on trees. Pregnancy is dangerous, and sex can be as well. If you really sit down and think about it, our "Zoo" instinct is to make it a big deal, as it is in the rest of nature. Otherwise your applying philosophical drivel to a biological function.
Author movingonandon Posted December 1, 2008 Author Posted December 1, 2008 Sex doesn't always equal emotional connection, sometimes, sex is just sex. I wish more people understood that wichout getting all worked up... there is no doubt that sex is the best when it is based on an emotional connection. But, saying that you should not have sex UNLESS it is in an emotionally involved relationship, or that 'empty' sex is something by-definition evil is just plain fascist (and I mean it). It is fine if you have either of these views of sex. Just don't try to make the case that one of them is "superior"*. Also, real people can and do have BOTH of these views of sex... *It is only superior from 'institutional' point of view - regulating sexual relations is obviously beneficial from social point of view. (A whole another discussion, but true.) In which case do your beliefs represent what you've found by yourself through reflection and self-awareness, or are you just repeating what you were told in sunday school?
amaysngrace Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 Sex doesn't always equal emotional connection, sometimes, sex is just sex. Yes it is. I can have unemotional sex. I have had unemotional sex. And then the guys won't leave me the frig alone. One did buy me really nice jewelry though and insisted we'd hang out with each others' families. He was offended because I didn't want to do that. I went along anyway. Then this other guy I slept with him once forever ago and he called just the other to to wish me happy thanksgiving. Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems that men get attached after sex too. It's not only women. It seems to me the less interested you are the more interested they become.
Untouchable_Fire Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 Yes it is. I can have unemotional sex. I have had unemotional sex. And then the guys won't leave me the frig alone. One did buy me really nice jewelry though and insisted we'd hang out with each others' families. He was offended because I didn't want to do that. I went along anyway. Then this other guy I slept with him once forever ago and he called just the other to to wish me happy thanksgiving. Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems that men get attached after sex too. It's not only women. It seems to me the less interested you are the more interested they become. Yes! This is a fundamental truth. Very insightful. This is the way I see it working. Everyone has this natural urge to have others be interested in us (not just sexually). So, when you show some interest and then take it away, the other person's most natural reaction is to try harder to get that interest back. It's the idea at the very core of many dating books. Anyway, that is all for another thread.
Author movingonandon Posted December 1, 2008 Author Posted December 1, 2008 It's called rejection. When you really like somebody, have sex with them... and they move on to someone else. You feel rejected. That's natural. The more intimate you get with them... the greater the feeling of rejection. It's not treating sex as a token. Those who do that... do it both ways!!! They give and withhold to get what they want. Asking another person to wait... is like asking for a show of good faith. If i like a girl, have sex with her, and she rejects me, and moves on, I would feel bad and rejected. (Not a crazy hypothetical scenario, happened to a couple of friends...) Does this mean that I should not have had sex with her at all? Of course not. I'll still think of her for the longest time (like they did), but at least would have enjoyed our romp (duh). So don't do sexay times with anybody just because you could be rejected, eh? My main problem with your position is the assumption that if a guy has sex with a girl and for whatever reason he doesn't stick around, by definition she is somehow a victim... This type of anglo-saxon guilt baout sex might be the reason i never get married!
Author movingonandon Posted December 1, 2008 Author Posted December 1, 2008 Yes! This is a fundamental truth. Very insightful. This is the way I see it working. Everyone has this natural urge to have others be interested in us (not just sexually). So, when you show some interest and then take it away, the other person's most natural reaction is to try harder to get that interest back. It's the idea at the very core of many dating books. Anyway, that is all for another thread. This only works for beginners . Even if I like a girl very much and she pulls the "retreat" card, my reaction these days is a friendly "nice try, mylady" acknowledgement, and keep going with whatever I thought is appropriate to begin with . In fact, if there is any "retaliation", it would be a retreat from my side rather than more excited pursuit. As a voice with a british accent in a PBS documentary would say
Isolde Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 I think the reason girls are wary of this is because they're worried the relationship won't last and therefore they will have "wasted" a sexual partner. I don't think it has as much to do with what the guy thinks of them. Just my theory.
Untouchable_Fire Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 My main problem with your position is the assumption that if a guy has sex with a girl and for whatever reason he doesn't stick around, by definition she is somehow a victim... This type of anglo-saxon guilt baout sex might be the reason i never get married! LOL... Anglo-Saxon? That is a fairly universal viewpoint that spans continents, religions, and cultures. If guy misrepresents himself to a woman... then she has a right to feel the victim. How can you honestly say otherwise? Riddle me this. If niether person has any emotional interest in the other person, what is the difference between that sex and masterbation?
Author movingonandon Posted December 1, 2008 Author Posted December 1, 2008 I think the reason girls are wary of this is because they're worried the relationship won't last and therefore they will have "wasted" a sexual partner. I don't think it has as much to do with what the guy thinks of them. Just my theory. So what? It's not like their hm-hms are made out of incredibly fragile prescious metal ? Same problem "jeez, i had sex with this guy, and all I got in return was... sex". The horror! The horror !
Author movingonandon Posted December 1, 2008 Author Posted December 1, 2008 LOL... Anglo-Saxon? That is a fairly universal viewpoint that spans continents, religions, and cultures. If guy misrepresents himself to a woman... then she has a right to feel the victim. How can you honestly say otherwise? Riddle me this. If niether person has any emotional interest in the other person, what is the difference between that sex and masterbation? What do you mean, misrepresenting? I'm hanging out with a girl, going on dates, making out, have sex, we like each other. What she assumes about this interaction is her, not mine problem unless mutual expectations are articulated (which does not happen until much later point and marks the transition from 'dating' to commited relationship...). It's not like I'd promise her to get married in order to go to bed . In all seriousness, how many accomplished casanovas get girls by promising them white picket fences and two dogs :cool:. Which once again brings me back to the point that if a woman genuinely likes a man, none of that gaming/strategizing/waiting will ever come into play. that's why I think that it is fair to treat a prolonged dating with no bedroom escalation as a likely waste of time. As for sex with no emations vs masturbation, you've gotta be kidding me . And the fact that you have "no deep emotional connection" does not mean that whoever you're sleeping with is not a lot of fun to hang out with.
Isolde Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 So what? It's not like their hm-hms are made out of incredibly fragile prescious metal ? Same problem "jeez, i had sex with this guy, and all I got in return was... sex". The horror! The horror ! I wasn't stating an opinion. I was saying many girls take sex seriously and therefore want to wait a while (JUST like some GUYS want to wait too). I don't understand why you would feel the need to criticize someone else's personal decision.
Untouchable_Fire Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 What do you mean, misrepresenting? I'm hanging out with a girl, going on dates, making out, have sex, we like each other. What she assumes about this interaction is her, not mine problem unless mutual expectations are articulated (which does not happen until much later point and marks the transition from 'dating' to commited relationship...). It's not like I'd promise her to get married in order to go to bed . In all seriousness, how many accomplished casanovas get girls by promising them white picket fences and two dogs :cool:. Which once again brings me back to the point that if a woman genuinely likes a man, none of that gaming/strategizing/waiting will ever come into play. that's why I think that it is fair to treat a prolonged dating with no bedroom escalation as a likely waste of time. You just proved why people should wait. You state that its not your responsibility to be honest, and that if she doesn't put out right away she is a waste of your time. I would take a hard look at how you view women as a gender. Personally, I believe all women hold more value than thier sexual organs. As for sex with no emations vs masturbation, you've gotta be kidding me . And the fact that you have "no deep emotional connection" does not mean that whoever you're sleeping with is not a lot of fun to hang out with. That failed to answer the question. Define the actual difference!
orangehose Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 So what? It's not like their hm-hms are made out of incredibly fragile prescious metal ? Same problem "jeez, i had sex with this guy, and all I got in return was... sex". The horror! The horror ! As about 20 people have said before on this thread, some people get more attached through sex than they would through non-sexual hanging out. So when dating someone they really like, they try to protect themselves by holding off until it seems like there's some authentic mutual interest and potential for an LTR. Waiting isn't necessarily a manipulative scheme to make the other person want them more. You can rail about the 'irrationality' of this all you want, but it seems to be the way many women (and some men) operate. And speaking personally, I'd want to trust and feel comfortable enough with the other person to get a detailed STD history.
Author movingonandon Posted December 1, 2008 Author Posted December 1, 2008 I wasn't stating an opinion. I was saying many girls take sex seriously and therefore want to wait a while (JUST like some GUYS want to wait too). I don't understand why you would feel the need to criticize someone else's personal decision. I'm not criticising a personal decision, I'm trying to understand the reasoning behind feeling like having "wasted" a guy. It cracks me up . the point is that when you put it this way, it is not just a personal opinion: this type of thinking places pretty serious expectations on the other side - in fact, overly serious. Just as women have the right to have sex whenever they want, men have the right to chose whether or not to play along whatever rules each individual woman has. I don't expect anybody to change their 'rules' because of me, but this also does not mean that I won't think that said rules are crazy :laugh:, and self-sabotaging. (A fair point to make given that they often achieve an opposite to the desired effect). But, then again, that's not my problem...
Author movingonandon Posted December 1, 2008 Author Posted December 1, 2008 You just proved why people should wait. You state that its not your responsibility to be honest, and that if she doesn't put out right away she is a waste of your time. I would take a hard look at how you view women as a gender. Personally, I believe all women hold more value than thier sexual organs. Expected, but uncalled for. The responsibility is mutual. And unless there has been an open discussion, nobody has the right to assume anything. End of story.
orangehose Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 Which once again brings me back to the point that if a woman genuinely likes a man, none of that gaming/strategizing/waiting will ever come into play. that's why I think that it is fair to treat a prolonged dating with no bedroom escalation as a likely waste of time. I disagree with you here - it's wrong to assume a woman doesn't really like a man because she doesn't put out immediately. However, if it feels like a waste of time, then just set an internal limit and bail - i.e., 3 dates, or whatever your patience level is. No big deal.
Gremio Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 I disagree with you here - it's wrong to assume a woman doesn't really like a man because she doesn't put out immediately. However, if it feels like a waste of time, then just set an internal limit and bail - i.e., 3 dates, or whatever your patience level is. No big deal. I've replied earlier, but I still agree with waiting and not rushing. I have rushed in the past, and though I don't regret it, I prefer to wait, as the sex would be that much better. Think about sex literally. Is it better to just jump in bed and ****, or have foreplay, with a lot of teasing, oral, etc?
berrieh Posted December 1, 2008 Posted December 1, 2008 I think if you are the type who views sex as something very intimate to be enjoyed with someone you genuinely care about, then you are more likely to wait to have sex. This is based on the assumption that intimacy and genuine care are not things you can develop by the 2nd or 3rd date. I do believe sex is something intimate to be enjoyed with someone I genuinely care about (he has expressed the same, and things are going lovely), and I recently had sex on the 2nd date (first time in my life). I already genuinely cared about the guy, and we had instant intimacy. So, I think that's a false assumption... but it's true a lot of the time.
Author movingonandon Posted December 1, 2008 Author Posted December 1, 2008 I disagree with you here - it's wrong to assume a woman doesn't really like a man because she doesn't put out immediately. However, if it feels like a waste of time, then just set an internal limit and bail - i.e., 3 dates, or whatever your patience level is. No big deal. My personal limit is 5-6 dates, so that's plenty of room, and that's pretty flexible too - it all depends on how exactly the actual interaction develops (which is also dependent on the context of the dates...). I not once implied that things *should* happen by date X. The whole tread started with situations when things do not happen for no particular reason. I.e. dating a month or two, things are going ok, but usually stop at "let's not rush it" etc. This is when it begins to feel as a waste of time. Also, I really don't like the term "put out" - it has discernible traces of the dreaded sentiment that she's doing something that she'd rather not do....
Recommended Posts