Ihavenoidea Posted May 26, 2010 Posted May 26, 2010 I don't necessarily view the high-number woman as "wrong". Being a low-number male, it's the imbalance of experience that would get to me. It is highly unlikely that I would compare well to most of her past partners and I wouldn't like knowing that she could find a new partner at the drop of a hat while it would take me months or years. Is it fair to say that someone with low numbers is inexperienced. If both partners are adventurous whats the difference in sleeping with 100 different women and sleeping with the same person 100 times?
TheBigQuestion Posted May 26, 2010 Posted May 26, 2010 I can only speak for the 18 to 25 age group. From what I've seen though, the women who get with larger numbers of men are without a doubt more likely to relationship-hop without any good reason and are also more likely to be less emotionally healthy. As far as ACTUAL cheating goes, I can't really say. With all that said, I personally would not choose someone who has a reputation for being "easy" as prime relationship material, although it's a red flag for me, not a dealbreaker. I personally don't want little miss innocent in bed with me, because that sounds boring, but I don't want the other extreme either. Like in other areas of life, balance is the key.
fishtaco Posted May 26, 2010 Posted May 26, 2010 Well, it doesn't bother me. To me, my feeling is that it's other women that look down on women that have had a lot of sexual partners. Also, the woman herself gets all defensive. There have been times where the woman is interested in having sex with me, but decided not to because she didn't want to "appear like she's a slut". I can't speak for other guys, but I could care less. And I don't understand why women or men for that matter, would buy into the double standard. The double standard makes sex less likely to happen. That's not a good thing in my books.
legallyblonde289 Posted May 26, 2010 Posted May 26, 2010 I don't necessarily view the high-number woman as "wrong". Being a low-number male, it's the imbalance of experience that would get to me. It is highly unlikely that I would compare well to most of her past partners and I wouldn't like knowing that she could find a new partner at the drop of a hat while it would take me months or years. that makes sense. guys with low numbers who prefer girls with low numbers, to me, is fine. it symbolizes that they want someone who has similar experiences and places a similar value on sex. my issue is with guys who bang tons of girls but only date girls whose number is less than 5. ive seen threads on here where guys say if a girl doesnt give it up by the third date, they dump them but yet if they've been with more than a few guys, they're not GF material. can someone explaint to me how that works?
sally4sara Posted May 26, 2010 Posted May 26, 2010 Well if a guy does not want to get some SDT's he should think a little before putting his willy in to a men-hole. I agree; one should wear rubber soled work boots, electrician's gloves, and miner's helmet, and a good set of thick work coveralls before entering a men-hole. Wait -what?!?!
A O Posted May 26, 2010 Posted May 26, 2010 Maybe it's just me, but I really don't see what the big deal is. If she is able to focus 100% of her energy on you and is clean, what's the big deal about her having been with more than one person? More than one person - you'd expect most people to have more than one person, so yes, you're right - there is no big deal. But a plethora pf partners, and especially in close range of each other, then that can be a reliable indicator of a person with self-esteem issues. A person looking for love and attention, from others that they can't seem to give themselves. This type of behavior you'll find more prevalent in women than men. The counter to this you'll find among men who can't handle women with even a modest amount of past partners - well under double fingers I'm talking about here. A person would be a fool to dismiss the behavior of either, out of hand. Sometimes I wondered where the double standard started. Its human nature to judge - that's where it come from. So, just as women judge the male sex drive, then too, do men the other way around. The latter is well acknowledged, and women often feel victimized because of it. The former, is so damn ingrained that it usually goes unnoticed. But men are constantly judged for their sex drives, and any women who chooses to behave like a stereotypical male, shouldn't expect to get a free pass just because she's a women. Because most men sure as heck don't. .
xpaperxcutx Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 Actually I think the census here is slightly off especially if you factor in the people who have sexual partners mostly out of relationships. Take me for example, I started being sexually active at 18, had one semi serious relationship, and then a bunch of dates and fwbs, most of them ending up with sex. Would that still fit in with the logistics that person would have two partners every year or so? I can say just for the past year alone I've slept with 5 people. But I've been tested, and I used condoms everytime. And if you think I sleep with that many people all year round, you're secondguessing me. Sometimes I can go celibate and go for a year without sex.
Author MrNate Posted May 27, 2010 Author Posted May 27, 2010 that makes sense. guys with low numbers who prefer girls with low numbers, to me, is fine. it symbolizes that they want someone who has similar experiences and places a similar value on sex. my issue is with guys who bang tons of girls but only date girls whose number is less than 5. ive seen threads on here where guys say if a girl doesnt give it up by the third date, they dump them but yet if they've been with more than a few guys, they're not GF material. can someone explaint to me how that works?[/QUOTE] now that's the million dollar question. I just find it silly to hold someone to standards you don't hold yourself too. But then again, maybe I'm just too laid back to care.
A O Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 I just find it silly to hold someone to standards you don't hold yourself too. We're different, the sexes are different. Some people get that, some people don't. So, just like you'll find some women dismissing a weak man - even though he's stronger than her, then so too will you find some men being dismissive of a sexually active women, even though he is too. With my other point being - we tend to judge within the pool we're targeting rather than, or moreso than, towards ourselves, which again, is simply human nature. .
brainygirl Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 I have a don't ask don't tell policy about my sexual past. I don't tell people how many I've slept with and I don't expect him to tell me. I figure past is past, now is what counts. When I have evidence now of him being an a$$ hat then I'll deal with it.
tami-chan Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 What exactly is wrong with a woman who has had many partners? The same thing that is wrong with men who has had many partners. This is a simple, straightforward Math. The more partners one has, the more likely it is that one will contract some type of STD.
daphne Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 Contrary to popular belief some people stil have standards and look at sex as an expression of love and not just something to do for fun. I do not know any such people. We're outdated.
Ihavenoidea Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 I do not know any such people. We're outdated. Looks like you and I are the only ones left.
daphne Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 At least we don't have to worry so much about STD's like everyone else..
somedude81 Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 (edited) Ugh, this is so frustrating! Times have changed, people! I'm 21 years old, and have had relations with 20+ men and a few women. I've been sexually active since I was 16, so for 5 years. This doesn't mean that I am not interested in relationships. In fact, it's the opposite. The bulk of these numbers come from a period of 6 months, where I slept with a new guy every week or so. Most girls don't deserve to be called sluts but I make exceptions in certain cases. Edited May 27, 2010 by somedude81
legallyblonde289 Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 Are you serious? Is the OP and anyone who agrees with him gonna tell me they don't see anything wrong with the above? Yeah, I'll explain it to you. But only after I'm able to explain another puzzle: why a woman would want to get into a relationship with a guy desired by many women, but expect him to be only monogamous with her. I'll explain the male peculiarities after I'm done explaining the female peculiarities. well i really don't give a crap whether a guy is desired by other women, i only care if he's desired by me. i don't know any women that are like hmm, i like this guy but there's no other girls chasing him so i won't go out with him. that would be ridiculous.
Art_Critic Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 Wait -what?!?! Now that school is out it seems the number of children posting on LS has increased..
Art_Critic Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 Most girls don't deserve to be called sluts but I make exceptions in certain cases. Your just jealous .. I can smell it a mile away..
brainygirl Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 You and every woman you know must be in the minority. I've met many women who have openly stated they would be skeptical to date a man who has a hard time getting a girlfriend. I've also read it too (some on this forum). I once refused a "wink" from a 30 year old who admitted he never had a relationship. Because how do you get to 30 without at least one girlfriend? its says scary things about his social skills.
Lovelybird Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 (edited) I bet he's my ex who had that view and was TRAGIC in bed. How is that ? Was his skills sucks or attitude sucks? What did make him bad exactly ? I think the skills can be improved through practice, with time? So many of you would think the more sex partners, the more desirable lover? Edited May 27, 2010 by Lovelybird
brainygirl Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 Shh! Don't say that. legallyblonde doesn't think women like you exist. If he had just chosen not to answer the question and winked at me, I may have been receptive to a date. Its almost like "I don't have time for someone who is clueless about how clueless they are" does that make any sense? Does it make me an awful person?
legallyblonde289 Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 Shh! Don't say that. legallyblonde doesn't think women like you exist. when you first made that statement, i took it to mean that guys had to have a bunch of girls after them at the moment, which to require that is completely ridiculous. i believe their are women who wouldnt date someone who never had a relationship by 30. i, however, wouldnt rule him out just from that, although i would be alert for other things. you never know why someone hasnt been in a relationship, they could have been focusing on their career etc. how would they ever get a relationship if every girl thought like that? (although that's probably not a good thing to broadcast either)
Lovelybird Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 If he had just chosen not to answer the question and winked at me, I may have been receptive to a date. Its almost like "I don't have time for someone who is clueless about how clueless they are" does that make any sense? Does it make me an awful person? Some women just don't have the ability to find the gold, so I won't turn down a man who hasn't many dating experiences
Crazy Magnet Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 How is that ? Was his skills sucks or attitude sucks? What did make him bad exactly ? I think the skills can be improved through practice, with time? So many of you would think the more sex partners, the more desirable lover? The skills were non existent. The attitude was horrible. He wasn't open to trying or learning new things or leaning about me and my body. Missionary, start to finish, every time. THAT made him bad. He has plenty of "experience" but he never learned from it. He mostly had casual sex and clearly never learned to connect emotions and intimacy with the whole process. Practice and time did nothing for this man. He was just truly horrible in bed.
Lovelybird Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 The skills were non existent. The attitude was horrible. He wasn't open to trying or learning new things or leaning about me and my body. Missionary, start to finish, every time. THAT made him bad. He has plenty of "experience" but he never learned from it. He mostly had casual sex and clearly never learned to connect emotions and intimacy with the whole process. Practice and time did nothing for this man. He was just truly horrible in bed. Ok, I see. Then it is about attitude really. He is a selfish lover. And people's attitude and quality simply show up in their sex activity. If it is an attitude matter, then a person can strive to be a better man or woman, learn how to connect with others, and be less selfish in all areas. If it is a pure skill matter, people will dwell on having many sexual partners, in their mind, the more sex partners, the more desirable she/he becomes, according to many of posters here, but this isn't true. As I understand here, if a person trys to be less selfish, and be more concern about the other, even if he is less experienced, sooner or later he will become one excellent lover. The point here isn't in if he has more sex partners or not, the point here is What kind of person he is, all in one's mind and heart. And if one wants to be married to one person A one day, what is the point that this one has many experiences with B, C, D.....? What is the point that this one learns so well about B, C, D.... in the sex area? Isn't A an individual who are different from B, C, D....?
Recommended Posts