Stark Posted July 15, 2009 Posted July 15, 2009 that includes all random hookups, sex, everything, and it's done purely by choice until you meet someone you really want to be with? I want to see If I'm a freak here or there are more people like me.
Thaddeus Posted July 15, 2009 Posted July 15, 2009 16 years. From infancy to 16 years old. But I get the sense that's not what you were asking. About 15 months or so after my first wife died, that was my longest "going without" period.
lofi_tokyo Posted July 15, 2009 Posted July 15, 2009 Hmm well I've been single for about a year now, but I spent 3 months crying over my ex - so we'll say 9 months by choice? Maybe a little less? Its nice being single, at least for now
Thornton Posted July 15, 2009 Posted July 15, 2009 Since I was 16, around 3 months is the longest I've been single. Sometimes I had a new bf before I dumped the old one
Trialbyfire Posted July 15, 2009 Posted July 15, 2009 I went on a dating strike that lasted for around 6+ months. I strongly encourage people to do so, if they have issues within, to address. Rebounding quickly or swinging from branch to branch, are not ways to heal serious emotional trauma.
kizik Posted July 15, 2009 Posted July 15, 2009 So far it's not looking good Get ready for the long haul! Pros to being single: -lots of masturbation -weed smoking -unlimited freedom Cons to being single: -lots of masturbation -weed smoking -unlimited freedom :lmao:
LDR Posted July 15, 2009 Posted July 15, 2009 4 years. Met guys but wasnt interested in anyone for 4 years. Strange, I know:eek:
Thaddeus Posted July 15, 2009 Posted July 15, 2009 Sometimes I had a new bf before I dumped the old one So you're a cheater?
EddieN Posted July 15, 2009 Posted July 15, 2009 So you're a cheater? Sounds like it. Also, anyone who hasn't been single for any longer than 3 months is obviously a slut who NEEDS to attach to a guy in order to feel secure.
lora22 Posted July 15, 2009 Posted July 15, 2009 Being single About a year - I had some things I needed to work out.
Butterflying Posted July 15, 2009 Posted July 15, 2009 But I've had semi-relationships during this time. Most of them last anywhere from 2 weeks to 6 months. But I've just been dating still looking for the right person I guess. I'm happy! I date quite a bit. A lot of that is repeat dating. I've been repeatedly dating one guy for the past three years. He doesn't want to commit. He's not possesive. But we have a great time together what little time we spend together.
Author Stark Posted July 15, 2009 Author Posted July 15, 2009 Get ready for the long haul! Pros to being single: -lots of masturbation -weed smoking -unlimited freedom Cons to being single: -lots of masturbation -weed smoking -unlimited freedom :lmao: Haha, I love how you put masturbation and the rest as both a pro and a con. It's curious to see so many different answers, felt a bit relieved that some were closer to mine in the later posts.... Reason I asked is just out of general curiousity and to see if it's normal to be single for long periods of time by choice. It was (just recently) 5 years for me, nice to see theres people who have been close and some (carhill thats commendable) even longer.
39388 Posted July 15, 2009 Posted July 15, 2009 There was a stretch from 22 to 35 I have you beat. Birth to 35 and counting. I guess beaing a doormat is worse than anything else when it comes to relationships.
Thaddeus Posted July 15, 2009 Posted July 15, 2009 I guess beaing a doormat is worse than anything else when it comes to relationships.Yea, that pretty much nails it. Thankfully, it's something you can change.
Stevo06 Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 has been single since 03 and thats fine theres someone somewere
utterer of lies Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 Also, anyone who hasn't been single for any longer than 3 months is obviously a slut who NEEDS to attach to a guy in order to feel secure. Why so negative? Some people just can't handle being alone. It's their life. If they rather spend time with someone they are not completely sure about than be alone, who are you to judge. Especially after you proved to be a true gentlemen yourself, calling her a slut.
Star Gazer Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 The OP asks the longest period of time we've gone without "seeing" someone, not the longest period of time we've been single or gone without sex. So, using "seeing someone" as the standard (which I would include as anywhere from a date up to the point right before exclusivity and/or sex), I think the longest I've gone without at least "seeing" someone is probably 2, maybe 3 months.
eiithan Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 5 years. Right now I am hitting the 1.2 years mark. Due to my schedule overseas, it seems I'll remain single at least to the summer of 2010...
IcemanJB Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 Weird, I was just thinking about this the other day. I realized the time periods between girls I've seen are the SAME. Of the last 3 girls I've seen, all the gaps in between them are 1 year and 4 months. I'm currently on month 9 since I stopped seeing the last girl...so that means in February I'll start seeing a new girl. Guaranteed.
carhill Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 The OP asks the longest period of time we've gone without "seeing" someone, not the longest period of time we've been single or gone without sex. There was that stretch from 22 to 35 On the upside, I saved enough money during that time to enable me to survive my current divorce in relatively solvent fashion Now, tell me, when does the clock officially start counting again? When the ink is dry on the divorce papers or when my wife and I no longer co-habitate (at about six months now)? If the latter, I may have to open a new savings account, since I have no intention of dating anyone until the divorce is final. anyone who hasn't been single for any longer than 3 months is obviously a slut who NEEDS to attach to a guy in order to feel secure. While your assertion targets women, I think this one is pretty equal opportunity. Men can just as easily be of a monkey-branch, ego-validating psychology. It's just, as men, we see it more clearly in women and perhaps less clearly in ourselves. Having faced that temptation, I can appreciate the power of it. I personally wouldn't be so harsh on others who prefer that methodology as long as all parties are in agreement, absent the cheating of course.
Recommended Posts