You'reasian Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 guys, would you commit to a chick who puts out easily without getting to know you or one who doesn't put out easily until she knows you? Now the question has changed a little. Its a dual process. The two of you have sex AND get to know each other over time.
Stockalone Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 Now the question has changed a little. Its a dual process. The two of you have sex AND get to know each other over time. I need to get to know a woman BEFORE I am willing to have sex with her.
fishtaco Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 Why would you assume the chick who's putting out easily is doing so because she's pressured? That wasn't part of the question. Adding all kinds of different factors into the question just makes things complicated. Its a simple question for guys, and they don't need a chick on here harping them for their preference. Like the title stated, guys, would you commit to a chick who puts out easily without getting to know you or one who doesn't put out easily until she knows you? Why would you assume I'm assuming? I'm simply saying that's one of the many possible scenarios, make sure this doesn't happen. Do you disagree? Do you think it's the men's job to get women to put out, and as soon as they put out, you enjoy the poontang pie, then tell her she's a slut, not good enough for you, then you leave? Sounds like a crappy exit strategy. If a man is all about relationships and commitment, then don't go around boning all the "sluts". If you're banging chicks on the first date, even if you didn't pressure her into it, you're the same as she is. If you judge her, you've just judged yourself. Me, I don't judge. I think it's great if a woman isn't afraid to enjoy sex. So I get to bang all the chicks I want without being a hypocrite. Maybe I want a serious relationship, maybe I don't. Sex has very little to do with it. There are many other factors I will look at to make my decision. If you think I'm immoral and dirty. Okay. You be moral and clean then. And you don't bang chicks early either. Because if you do, that makes you the same as me.
LovieDove24 Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 I believe MANY females fall into the category of believing "sex a relationship does make." It feels like such an amazing "connection" that of course the relationship will just fall into place, right? The strong emotional intimacy that many women often tie to the act of sex is what provides this false sense of connection. What is merely physical for the male is felt both physically and emotionally for the female. This is all generally speaking of course, but general speaking does have some basis does it not? On a side note, I cannot tell you how many times I've seen women friends (and me too before I knew better) stay in crappy relationships just because she was attached through sex. Its a false sense of "being" for women if its not done with the right guy. Not only this but I find it a bit tacky to sleep together too soon. You wake up and its like, uhhh, now what was your last name again?
LovieDove24 Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 Actually, after re-reading my last post, I think alot of people fall into the category of believing "sex a relationship does make." People feel such intense chemistry for one another (believe me I've been there) that they think "Hey this persons GOTTA be good for me." Not so fast...try getting in their head first by talking before feeling that they're a keeper. Just my opinion of course, and if you haven't guessed already its all the reason as to why I wait for sex.
carhill Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 Without reading the thread, neither. "Putting out" has no bearing on my desire to commit.
elaina Posted March 15, 2009 Posted March 15, 2009 This thread has been very interesting. As a girl, I have to say that I do not like easy guys. They are a big turnoff I take my beliefs seriously and for me, having sex before marriage is not right, but even if I wasn't serious in my beliefs, I wouldn't like an easy guy, and I don't like even drinking from the same glass with a guy that I don't know and trust. You never know who has cooties or worse, lol I am very picky though, and have heard of too many horror stories from friends who got herpes or something because they made the decision to "put out" with someone they didn't know very well. In today's day and age, I think it is a big mistake to not get tested first. Some people are carriers of disease without even showing symptoms. Lol and to ask someone to please get tested, you really should know them for at least a month. How would you like it if you met someone and they said, guess what? for our first date, let's visit the clinic!
Cherished Posted March 15, 2009 Posted March 15, 2009 Absolutely. I think even if you are already in a relationship, make sure he or she is monogamous and ask them to get fully tested for STDs before you get intimate sexually in anyway. Even if they say "Hey, I just was billed fully clean" well, how do you know they didn't sleep with someone the same night after they got their results? Make a simple trip to the doctor, get the 'clean bill of health' papers, and then go to it, but make it clear you expect monogamy. The problem with this is still that there is not a screen for HPV for men yet, and there are some nasty HPVs which can give you warts and cancer. So....wear a condom, at least you're protecting yourself to some extent.
elaina Posted March 15, 2009 Posted March 15, 2009 Absolutely. I think even if you are already in a relationship, make sure he or she is monogamous and ask them to get fully tested for STDs before you get intimate sexually in anyway. Even if they say "Hey, I just was billed fully clean" well, how do you know they didn't sleep with someone the same night after they got their results? Make a simple trip to the doctor, get the 'clean bill of health' papers, and then go to it, but make it clear you expect monogamy. The problem with this is still that there is not a screen for HPV for men yet, and there are some nasty HPVs which can give you warts and cancer. So....wear a condom, at least you're protecting yourself to some extent. Yeah, trust is essential. About condoms, yuck! I don't like condoms cause it doesn't seem like real sex to me. I think it is sad how so many men and I guess women too today think of sex just as a recreational pleasure without commitment and without true love. Sex is awesome and is the best feeling in the world, but when there's no commitment and love, it becomes just easy come, easy go!
You'reasian Posted March 15, 2009 Posted March 15, 2009 Yeah, trust is essential. About condoms, yuck! I don't like condoms cause it doesn't seem like real sex to me. I think it is sad how so many men and I guess women too today think of sex just as a recreational pleasure without commitment and without true love. Sex is awesome and is the best feeling in the world, but when there's no commitment and love, it becomes just easy come, easy go! Good point. Sex with love and commitment is awesome.
sxyNYCcpl Posted March 15, 2009 Posted March 15, 2009 Sex with love and commitment is awesome. So is sex without love and commitment!
Author mr.dream merchant Posted March 15, 2009 Author Posted March 15, 2009 Why would you assume I'm assuming? I'm simply saying that's one of the many possible scenarios, make sure this doesn't happen. Do you disagree? Do you think it's the men's job to get women to put out, and as soon as they put out, you enjoy the poontang pie, then tell her she's a slut, not good enough for you, then you leave? Sounds like a crappy exit strategy. If a man is all about relationships and commitment, then don't go around boning all the "sluts". If you're banging chicks on the first date, even if you didn't pressure her into it, you're the same as she is. If you judge her, you've just judged yourself. Me, I don't judge. I think it's great if a woman isn't afraid to enjoy sex. So I get to bang all the chicks I want without being a hypocrite. Maybe I want a serious relationship, maybe I don't. Sex has very little to do with it. There are many other factors I will look at to make my decision. If you think I'm immoral and dirty. Okay. You be moral and clean then. And you don't bang chicks early either. Because if you do, that makes you the same as me. Rofl? Its not about not wanting to screw a freak. I'm sure we've all had our turn with one before. Its about wanting to commit to one. What tangent are you on? Just answer the question, who's judging you?
Cherished Posted March 15, 2009 Posted March 15, 2009 So is sex without love and commitment! Sex is just sex without love and commitment. Making love is so much more fun.
GoodOnPaper Posted March 15, 2009 Posted March 15, 2009 Sex is just sex without love and commitment. Making love is so much more fun. So I hear . . . I wish my marriage bore that out. I thought that commitment would loosen some of her inhibitions but that has not been the case at all. Unfortunately, I don't have any casual sex experiences to compare this to, so I'm left wondering if "making love" is really all that it's cracked up to be. Relating to the OP, I think getting an early sense of how open and uninhibited your partner is sexually is important. Hence, a woman could enhance her chances of my committing to her by being physical sooner rather than later.
JerseyShortie Posted March 15, 2009 Posted March 15, 2009 The reverse could be said: "A man enchances chance of having sex when he shows more of a commitment to a woman."
GoodOnPaper Posted March 15, 2009 Posted March 15, 2009 The reverse could be said: "A man enchances chance of having sex when he shows more of a commitment to a woman." That is exactly what I believed when I was single. From a very early point, I knew I would never attract a lot of women, so the idea of finding that one woman who would make me feel like a rock star was very appealing. Unfortunately, showing more of a commitment -- or even indicating that I was open to the idea of committing -- was seen as needy, predictable, and boring.
carhill Posted March 15, 2009 Posted March 15, 2009 GoodOnPaper, it seems, IME, that as one ages, this dynamic shifts. Your weaknesses (if ability to commit is perceived that way by yourself) become your strengths. Timing is everything Also, as one ages, the value of each day gathers more emotional importance. If one looks too far ahead, one sees death Hence, one tends to value the here and now, at least that's how I've come to see it. YMMV
sxyNYCcpl Posted March 15, 2009 Posted March 15, 2009 Rofl? Its not about not wanting to screw a freak. I'm sure we've all had our turn with one before. Its about wanting to commit to one. What tangent are you on? Just answer the question, who's judging you? Who is judging? Umm, I'd say you just did. Or is calling someone a freak based on their sexual behaviors, and then saying that screwing them is okay but committing to them is bad not being judgmental?
Author mr.dream merchant Posted March 15, 2009 Author Posted March 15, 2009 Who is judging? Umm, I'd say you just did. Or is calling someone a freak based on their sexual behaviors, and then saying that screwing them is okay but committing to them is bad not being judgmental? If someone is putting out before even knowing you, they're freaky. If I'm a single male, you're damn right I'll get my rocks off with a freaky chick, nothing wrong with that. I'd just rather not commit to a girl like that. I'm male, I can distinguish between sex and love. Nobody said anything about committing to a freak being "bad" either. So here I am again asking, what's your point?
sxyNYCcpl Posted March 15, 2009 Posted March 15, 2009 So here I am again asking, what's your point? My point is twofold. First, you claimed you were not being judgmental, I pointed out that, in fact, you were. Second, you are a hypocrite. It seems perfectly acceptable to you to have sex early in a relationship, but it indicates the chick is "freaky". Putting aside for a moment that that may or not be an accurate assessment, it also means that YOU are freaky. Ergo, when you go on to opine that "freaky chicks" are not worthy of commitment, does it not also follow that YOU are not someone worthy of commitment? Or do you really believe the codswallop that it's a reasonable thing to have different standards for men and women? If you think the ability to distinguish between love and sex is limited only to men, you have a lot to learn. Attitudes that hold that different sexual standards are reasonable do lead to that belief, however.
Author mr.dream merchant Posted March 16, 2009 Author Posted March 16, 2009 My point is twofold. First, you claimed you were not being judgmental, I pointed out that, in fact, you were. Second, you are a hypocrite. It seems perfectly acceptable to you to have sex early in a relationship, but it indicates the chick is "freaky". Putting aside for a moment that that may or not be an accurate assessment, it also means that YOU are freaky. Ergo, when you go on to opine that "freaky chicks" are not worthy of commitment, does it not also follow that YOU are not someone worthy of commitment? Or do you really believe the codswallop that it's a reasonable thing to have different standards for men and women? If you think the ability to distinguish between love and sex is limited only to men, you have a lot to learn. Attitudes that hold that different sexual standards are reasonable do lead to that belief, however. Well there's a couple things wrong with your post that I'll be more than happy to clear up for you. Yes I am freaky. I'm not ashamed of that. Yes I will enjoy great sex with random chicks when I am single. No I do not see girls who have sex with guys they don't know as "unworthy" of an exclusive relationship. And as much as you'd like to believe, I am not judging anyone. Freaky isn't degradation by any means, it just means you enjoy sex, as do I. Who I choose to commit to is just a preference that's all. If you lined up an overweight girl and more in shape one I'd prefer to take the more in shape one for a spin. Place that in shape girl next to one with a lot of ass and a bit of chub, then I'm taking the chubster for a spin instead of the in shape one. You see where I'm going with this? I have preferences like every other human being on this planet. Any other accusations you'd like for me to clear up? =)
sxyNYCcpl Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 Yes I am freaky. I'm not ashamed of that. Welcome to the club. No I do not see girls who have sex with guys they don't know as "unworthy" of an exclusive relationship. Well, I'll accept your statement, but it sure seemed you were implying otherwise in your prior post. And as much as you'd like to believe, I am not judging anyone. Freaky isn't degradation by any means, it just means you enjoy sex, as do I. I agree with you, freaky isn't degrading. Quite the opposite IMO. Unfortunately, there are many who do not agree with that, and even worse, there are those who truly believe that behavior that is acceptable from men is cause for scorn should women engage in the same behavior. I thought you may be one of them, if not, please accept my apologies. I have preferences like every other human being on this planet. Any other accusations you'd like for me to clear up? =) We all have preferences, and there is nothing wrong with that for the most part. That you like blondes, brunettes, redheads, tall, short, thin, fat, men, women, or both doesn't matter. Your thing is your thing and whatever that is, it's all good as long as they are consenting adults. However, when you expect a standard of behavior from your partner, or potential partner, that you do not demand of yourself, well, that is not good.
You'reasian Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 So is sex without love and commitment! Sex alone is awesome, but with genuine love and commitment, its better - well, IMO.
Recommended Posts