When do you have the Exclusive Talk?

[WhyMe1980]

I responded on another thread below about taking down a match.com profile and when was the last time they were active. It got me to think of asking you all this question.

 

When do you have the exclusivity talk? Does it just sort of happen naturally? You start spending all your social time together, etc.? Does a simple little phrase like calling me his girlfriend suffice?

 

We have slept together a half dozen times. Went away together last weekend. Plan on going away this weekend. Talk all day long. BUT, I did notice today his Match.com profile is still active and he had been online within the past hour. I am exclusive. A given for me. I told him upfront. Should I ask him to do the same/verify that I prefer we remain monogamous (sp?)?

 

Any advice from you dating veterans would be greatly appreciated!

[BobSacamento]

Why would he want to be exclusive when he's getting everything he wants without it?

[WhyMe1980]

So did go over and help him take care of his friend's dog then to dinner. I told him what I was thinking and we did get some clarity around what was happening between us. Basically I made it a deal breaker that he not see anyone else. He says he wasn't anyway and I tend to believe him.

 

I am recently out of a 14 year exclusive relationship (married for a good portion of it) so while perhaps we moved very fast to the physical portion of the relationship (hence your comment below Bob), what we have is all that I can handle at this moment anyway. Not looking to get married again for a long time. But do appreciate the love and support of a steady. So, I guess we are more or less on the same page.

 

Still don't have an answer for the match.com thing but it wasn't worth bringing up really. I noticed someone posted that opening an email that is cookied resets your online status and other stuff so who knows. Can't obsesses about it.

 

Why would he want to be exclusive when he's getting everything he wants without it?

[sugarmomma]

The fact that he still has his profile on match says that while he likes being with you he has his options open for a BBD (bigger better deal).

 

I would give myself a timeline to see if he removes it. You want him to remove it because HE wants to not because YOU want him to. If you pressure him he will rebel. Once you reach your limit you will have to break up with him. Let his actions speak louder than his words and now his actions are saying "what else is out there?"

[torranceshipman]

I wonder about this myself...it's hard to know what the etiquette is with online dating - do you just stop using your profile after the 1st intimate time, or do people just not care and use their profile for ages, etc? I think the key here is: what did you guys decide? Was he respectful and considerate in that conversation and has he followed through with whatever he said he'd do (i.e.not using his profile anymore, or whatever?). These things are REALLY important. If he was not considerate &/or didn't give you the answers you wanted then I think this is a huge red flag.

[Thornton]

I think after three or four dates the relationship should be exclusive. Three or four dates is enough time to decide whether you like someone - if yes you go exclusive, if no you cut them loose and don't string them along. If you've had sex then the relationship should DEFINITELY be exclusive, and if someone I was having sex with was still using an online dating profile or seeing other women I'd be extremely upset and would dump him because I'd see his behaviour as cheating.

 

OP, if your man is still usng match.com you need to talk to him about the exclusivity of your relationship, and if he says you're not exclusive then stop having sex with him. In my book sex is something you only get in an exclusive relationship, so no exclusivity = no sex. There has to be some incentive for an exclusive relationship - why would he buy the cow when you're giving him the milk for free?

[Surfer Dude]

If people only relaxed their need for control and possessing other people, everyone would be happier. If you're having a good time with your boyfriend, why bring up any talk at all? Enjoy what you have and don't pay attention to any BS that's been programmed into you, such as "the talk". True love is unconditional and not needy, however you have set up some pretty clear conditions he must fulfill. It has nothing to do with love and respect for another person.

 

Incidentally, whenever people have "the talk", things suddenly start going stale and boring.

[torranceshipman]

I have to admit, I was thinking about this post while I was in the gym today (how random-go figure!)...anyway, I do agree with Surfer Dude that it's not good to feel you have to conform to strict rules. I say do what really feels respectful to you at all times BUT I think that can be a fluid, flexible thing that involves different conditions for different personalities. Really watch for red flags and go with your gut, but at the same time, don't sabotage something with a very exacting 'if they havent done x by date 4' or 'if they havent said this/that by date 3' or if x hasnt happened immediately after you were intimate, then he isn't into you and dump him'. That can really make you paranoid and ruin something.

 

Also I think sometimes people really need a lot of time to get to know eachother. Especially in todays dating climate where there is so much choice - if you are single, attractive, successful city dweller, etc, the rules can be quite different than if you are living in a very small town where peoples personalities are very different and there is way less choice from a dating perspective.

[Thornton]

If people only relaxed their need for control and possessing other people, everyone would be happier. If you're having a good time with your boyfriend, why bring up any talk at all?

 

I have to say I disagree entirely. Of course some men would like women to relax their need for exclusivity, because that means they can continue getting the milk for free without buying the cow. Not having the exclusivity talk means the man can carry on sowing his wild oats without committing exclusively to one woman. I would always have the exclusivity talk very early on, before sex even takes place, because he ain't getting the milk till he buys the cow. Until someone is prepared to have a proper exclusive relationship, we can only get to know each other as friends, there will be none of the benefits that come with exclusivity (i.e. sex).

 

When a relationship is non-exclusive, he could be sticking his pork sword in another woman and then sticking it in you later on the same day - et voila, you have a nasty STD before he even knows he's caught it. Exclusivity doesn't mean "we're staying together forever", it just means "I like and respect you enough to have a decent attempt at a relationship with you, and only you". It annoys me when people treat dating like they're at a buffet table; why can't they savour one course at a time?

[carhill]

Another aspect of compatibility. How each party feels (their emotional setpoint) about sexual and emotional exclusivity and fidelity.

 

The desire to talk about such things (or avoid talking about such things) is an additional aspect of compatibility, that of communication. Does each partner feel free to discuss and share their perspective and have it accepted and validated, or is their inhibition to do so and the feeling that some things are better left unsaid? Each of us is different in that regard.

 

Lastly, IMO, the emotion of love may be unconditional at its base but mature healthy adult relationships are conditional. That's why people have boundaries (those are the conditions) in relationships. Topically, the OP appears to have a boundary that commands exclusivity from her partner if she is to be emotionally and sexually faithful to him. He can choose to accept or reject that boundary. She can choose how to enforce the boundary should he reject it.

 

TBH, I would have liked to see a more proactive and definitive response from him than was shared by the OP, not because that makes him more 'right' but rather more compatible with the OP's philosophies of communication and intimacy. If she finds herself becoming more and more 'responsible' for relationship issues, that's another boundary worth examining. Good luck!

[Surfer Dude]

I have to say I disagree entirely. Of course some men would like women to relax their need for exclusivity, because that means they can continue getting the milk for free without buying the cow. Not having the exclusivity talk means the man can carry on sowing his wild oats without committing exclusively to one woman. I would always have the exclusivity talk very early on, before sex even takes place, because he ain't getting the milk till he buys the cow.

 

I despise the idea of sex as a reward. What you're basically saying here is you're trading sex for exclusivity. Am I the only one here who sees a problem with this idea? That's objectifying to a woman and building a relationship on such terms is like building a castle on a sand beach.

 

True love is when a guy and girl respect each other and can relax that need for validation and mutual possession. I date only women with high self esteem and women who respect our positive relationship, and who wouldn't mind me dating other women occasionally. Still, she'd never have to fear me leaving, because I don't believe in kicking people out of my life (dumping) when I meet someone new...

 

Until someone is prepared to have a proper exclusive relationship, we can only get to know each other as friends, there will be none of the benefits that come with exclusivity (i.e. sex).

Again, sex as a reward for exclusivity. Ugh, despicable. When are people going to embrace their nature and build positive relationships based on mutual attraction instead of spouting garbage that's been programmed into them by someone else. What are you getting out of your exclusivity? Where does that need stem from? Seriously, I'd like to know because I don't get it.

 

What you're saying is "give me your exclusive attention and validation and I will make my body your exclusive object". Like some contrived business deal. Crazy!

 

On a side note, I don't do friends first, sex later. I don't do auditions with women, wasting my time and money. If a woman proves her high self esteem and worth to me by sleeping with me, then and only then can we continue building our relationship and experiencing beautiful and positive things that follow.

 

It annoys me when people treat dating like they're at a buffet table; why can't they savour one course at a time?

Yes. When you're at a buffet table, you should only eat one course at a time. Because the experience of having only one course on your plate is so unique and amazing, that having many different courses wouldn't be as good, it would ruin your dinner experience. If you have multiple courses at a time, you can never have the special and amazing experience of having just one course... hahaha!!

 

Agent Smith: Do you hear that, Mr. Anderson? That is the sound of inevitability. That is the sound of exclusivity and forced monogamy, mr. Anderson.

Neo: My name... is Neo.

[CLC2008]

I date only women with high self esteem and women who respect our positive relationship, and who wouldn't mind me dating other women occasionally.

 

That’s not a woman with high self esteem, in fact, it is quite the opposite.

What separates us as human beings, is the ability, the desire to be monogamous.

 

For those that desire the opposite, well, that's a personal choice.

[carhill]

I date only women with high self esteem and women who respect our positive relationship, and who wouldn't mind me dating other women occasionally. Still, she'd never have to fear me leaving, because I don't believe in kicking people out of my life (dumping) when I meet someone new...

 

Great perspective. I will assume, for balance, that these women are free to occasionally date and have sex with other men too. That's very evolved. I like that. How do you communicate this to them?

[Surfer Dude]

Great perspective. I will assume, for balance, that these women are free to occasionally date and have sex with other men too.

 

Absolutely, I'd never try to possess a woman like a material object, I'd let her have experiences with other guys if she desires them.

 

How do you communicate this to them?

It's all about subcommunication from the early beginning and being congruent to the frame you're setting. Where people mess up is that they often come off as provider-type nice guys, and when they try to turn their LTR into an open LTR, sh*t hits the fan because:

 

 

1. Woman's feelings are hurt due to smashed expectations
   
2. The guy is being incongruent to how he acted in the beginning
   

There has been a lot of discussion on players, PUAs and alpha males around these parts lately, and the reason why these men can pull off what they do, is because they act like that from the moment they meet a new person. They subcommunicate their personality and people can immediately see what they can expect from them. When you do that, people won't question you and your motives, but rather they will accept you for who you are. They will just assume you're one of those people.

 

People only get hurt when you set up wrong expectations and later shatter their expectations, by dumping them for no reason etc.

 

Interestingly, this society says that polygamy is immoral (whatever morality means) and that people should be exclusive and similar nonsense trash. When in fact, the ways of this society are immoral, because replacing people like trash and leaving a trail of emotionally broken people in your wake is acceptable, even encouraged. Serial monogamy is far more damaging to people than polygamy, that's for sure.

[carhill]

Absolutely, I'd never try to possess a woman like a material object, I'd let her have experiences with other guys if she desires them.

 

"let" implies possession. I like "encourage" and "support" better. Sounds more evolved

 

Gotta keep those subcommunication signals consistent....

[samspade]

I despise the idea of sex as a reward. What you're basically saying here is you're trading sex for exclusivity. Am I the only one here who sees a problem with this idea? That's objectifying to a woman and building a relationship on such terms is like building a castle on a sand beach.

 

Agreed. If a woman is withholding sex for ANY reason, she's not worth keeping around. Women who think that men have to "earn" sex by providing them exclusivity (or anything else) are forgetting that the woman is also getting enjoyment from the sexual relationship. Otherwise, she's just trading sex for commodities, i.e., prostituting herself.

 

To the OP, if you enjoy spending time with him and want to keep him around, be patient. Bring it up when it feels right to you. But enjoy the ride, what's the rush?

[Stark]

I despise the idea of sex as a reward. What you're basically saying here is you're trading sex for exclusivity. Am I the only one here who sees a problem with this idea? That's objectifying to a woman and building a relationship on such terms is like building a castle on a sand beach.

 

Sex is not a reward, and I don't think the poster is implying that.

 

Sex is different for different people. Some people it's just a fun time, good way to get off. For other people it's more than just that, there are personal connections to it other than just a glorified way of masturbation.

 

So, why would someone want to give this up to some random person who can just as easily turn around and call it off after it?

 

It takes more self control and self respect to say no than yes just to inform you. Just because the person won't have sex with you doesn't mean they don't want to.

 

 

True love is when a guy and girl respect each other and can relax that need for validation and mutual possession. I date only women with high self esteem and women who respect our positive relationship, and who wouldn't mind me dating other women occasionally. Still, she'd never have to fear me leaving, because I don't believe in kicking people out of my life (dumping) when I meet someone new...

 

One can play the other side of the coin and say that if you experience true love there is no need to look at other partners sexually emotionally physically since you'd be so happy with what you have there is no desire for anything else than to be with that person.

 

Fair play to you if that's how you want to live your life, but if you are upfront about it, so people know what they are getting into, thats all that matters, because then it's their decision to enter in.

 

It's the people who lie about their intentions or don't make it clear. For example, if you were dating the person you quoted, and she gave you sex, and started growing fond of you, you have a different outlook on life, so you'll be away with other girls, which will hurt that person.

 

Which is why do you have "the talk," to make sure that you do not hurt people in the process. It's a sign of respect and consideration not self gratification and self-interest and all about you you you.

 

Again, sex as a reward for exclusivity. Ugh, despicable. When are people going to embrace their nature and build positive relationships based on mutual attraction instead of spouting garbage that's been programmed into them by someone else. What are you getting out of your exclusivity? Where does that need stem from? Seriously, I'd like to know because I don't get it.

 

If we were to all embrace our nature, there'd be mass killings, rapes, pillaging etc. Look at history as an example and all of the things men have done to each other.

 

Not saying that all think about this, just emphasizing the point that letting nature take control of us and start acting like animals because it's our nature is stupid.

 

What sets us different from animals is the ability to not act upon our nature but instead have the intelligence to second guess what we might think or feel and logically think it through. There is a reason we can build machines that fly and why that lion over there hasn't.

 

What you're saying is "give me your exclusive attention and validation and I will make my body your exclusive object". Like some contrived business deal. Crazy!

 

Maybe it's......people have different values about sex than you do and have enough self respect not to give it up for that reason. Why would you want to share your body and your desires with some idiot that is just wanting sex?

 

Glorified masturbation, I tell you.

 

Agent Smith: Do you hear that, Mr. Anderson? That is the sound of inevitability. That is the sound of exclusivity and forced monogamy, mr. Anderson.

Neo: My name... is Neo.

 

As I recall, Neo was exclusive with Trinity, and a point of the movie was that he was forced to choose between the one (and only) woman he loved or the entire extinction of Zion, of which he chose trinity.

 

Yet he still beat agent smith.

 

Bad example to pull .

[Surfer Dude]

Sex has nothing to do with self respect. So if I deny myself eating a cake that I like very much, I'm respecting myself? Blech.

The whole idea that sex is something we "give up to people" is just plain weird. It assumes that it's resource to withhold and use as a bargaining chip.

 

Although, for people who don't enjoy sex and glory of being human, yes they might come up with the idea that they should trade sex for other things.

 

Whatever. Do what you want people.

[Stark]

Sex has nothing to do with self respect.

 

If you desire it but won't give it due to your values on it at the start I would say so.

 

 

 

So if I deny myself eating a cake that I like very much, I'm respecting myself? Blech.

 

Well the cake example cannot relate to self respect, but it can relate to values.

 

Respecting yourself I meant that no matter your desire to have sex, your values are more important than lust and you won't give it to someone just because it's what they want or what needs to make them consider anything with you.

 

If the cake had much more significance to it than to be eaten, had some values to it yes not eating it out of desire for the taste but for the values it holds is important to some.(I've known people who've kept the bottles of alcohol they were given on their wedding days for over 20 years unopened).

 

That entirely depends upon your outlook on sex. Some see it as a fun time, others put more emphasis on it and as such will only give it to people that are truly serious with them.

 

 

The whole idea that sex is something we "give up to people" is just plain weird. It assumes that it's resource to withhold and use as a bargaining chip.

 

Well you're thinking of giving it up in an entirely different context.

 

Although, for people who don't enjoy sex and glory of being human, yes they might come up with the idea that they should trade sex for other things.

 

Whatever. Do what you want people.

 

No one said people don't enjoy sex, there are plenty of people who enjoy it just as much as you yet it has more meaning to them than you. It has an emotional bearing to it just as much as physical and people don't give their emotions out to any old person.

[Thornton]

If I am going to have sex with someone, it means I love them and I am prepared to have an exclusive relationship with them. I expect the same in return, and if they're not prepared to offer it then the relationship is over. I'm not asking them to offer anything I'm not offering myself - you seem to forget that exclusivity is a two-way thing, I am being exclusive to them as well as them being exclusive to me. I'm not offering them sex in exchange for exclusivity; I am offering them my exclusivity in exchange for their exclusivity. Once we are in a mutually exclusive relationship and have both been tested, I am prepared to do things like having sex. But I am not prepared to take the risk of having sex with a guy who may well be having sex with other women at the same time, and I am not prepared to emotionally connect with a guy through sex if he isn't totally committed to our relationship.

 

If a guy doesn't want an exclusive relationship, that's fine, but if that's the case they won't be having sex with me, because sex is something I reserve only for serious relationships. The problem is that a lot of guys have no intention of having an exclusive relationship, but they often keep quiet about that because they know that exclusivity is usually what women want. So the woman thinks they're having a loving exclusive relationship, while all the time the guy is banging other girls. I bet those guys who like to date several women at a time don't actually tell these women what they're doing, because they would get dropped like a hot potato.

[Thornton]

Sex has nothing to do with self respect. So if I deny myself eating a cake that I like very much, I'm respecting myself?

 

You may want to eat the cake, but you resist until you know you are the only one eating the cake. Partly because you don't want to catch diseases from other people who might be sharing your cake, and partly because you want to make sure you can rely on having your cake all to yourself. It's self respect in the sense that you have some standards; you're not prepared to share and you stand by that, however much you want the cake you don't eat it unless you're sure you're not sharing.

 

Many people don't see sex as just an enjoyable thing like eating cake, they see it as part of a committed relationship that can't be separated from the actual relationship part. Those people who see sex as just sex are usually the ones who end up hurting those people who see sex as part of a committed relationship.

[Surfer Dude]

Those people who see sex as just sex are usually the ones who end up hurting those people who see sex as part of a committed relationship.

 

Wrong. People who end up hurting other people are the ones who set up false expectations they can't possibly fulfill. No false expectations - no one gets hurt. People need to know what kind of deal they're getting from the early beginning.

 

A guy who acts dishonest and manipulates women with lies is what I described above - he makes promises that he can't keep (exclusivity, monogamy). He's just a liar. But then again, women do the same, so..

[Stark]

Wrong. People who end up hurting other people are the ones who set up false expectations they can't possibly fulfill. No false expectations - no one gets hurt. People need to know what kind of deal they're getting from the early beginning.

 

A guy who acts dishonest and manipulates women with lies is what I described above - he makes promises that he can't keep (exclusivity, monogamy). He's just a liar. But then again, women do the same, so..

 

For once I agree. This is correct. If someone is upfront at the very start and explains what they expect and what can/can't happen the person can choose to agree/disagree and pursue or drop.

 

This is why communication before you get that much more invested is key, I always make it a aim as I'm getting to know someone I like at the start to find out what they want out of seeing someone.

[Surfer Dude]

For once I agree. This is correct. If someone is upfront at the very start and explains what they expect and what can/can't happen the person can choose to agree/disagree and pursue or drop.

 

This is why communication before you get that much more invested is key, I always make it a aim as I'm getting to know someone I like at the start to find out what they want out of seeing someone.

 

Simply weed out people who won't give you the time of day, but always be totally honest and upfront about your needs and intentions. Saves a lot of time and no one gets "hurt".

[rod_in_gtown]

The bottom line is that you don't know why he did log onto his match.com account. He could just be looking at an email from you or looking at your profile.

 

I am dating this girl I met on match and I turned off my profile only because I keep getting winks and it's getting annoying responding to all of them. It's too much for me and I'm happy with my current matches.