Star Gazer Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 Arent you the girl that attacked your date and had sex in the car? This is also true...and it didn't work out for the OP.
Insanitylater Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 This is also true...and it didn't work out for the OP. Is Ocean trying to validate her actions so she can not feel quilty or what? Can anyone on here understand what is going on in her head and how she thinks this stuff out ? I'm not being mean I am being dead serious.
Sabali Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 I tend to do this also, but its backfired at least once when a guy was "you slept with me the X date" when we were talking about getting serious. But I'm thinking, "yeah and you slept with me, so its a case of the pot calling out the kettle asshat" Unfortunately, some thing will stick in our culture. No matter how more independent and liberated women become, it will always be appropriate for men to pay for the first date and most dates afterwards. If a man and a woman have sex on the first date, the man will be able to escape any responsibility or negative connotation associated with it and so on. Each side get the short end of the straw in many situations when it comes to relationships. Being comfortable with your self, sexuality and desires is important in regards to this discussion.
xpaperxcutx Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 Is Ocean trying to validate her actions so she can not feel quilty or what? Can anyone on here understand what is going on in her head and how she thinks this stuff out ? I'm not being mean I am being dead serious. I think Ocean is getting desperate about keeping a date around.
Yamaha Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 FYI...... ezinearticles.com/?How-Long-Should-You-Wait-to-Have-Sex?&id=4609990
Angel1111 Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 Yea, having sex early on is a great idea. That way, if you get to know the guy and decide you actually don't like him after all, you've set yourself up for a major break-up instead of just stopping dating him. Or you end up staying with him because it's just easier because you've made this physical committment with him. Or if you do like him, then you've proven that you don't think enough of yourself to believe that a guy would actually like you for who you are, and that you basically think that guys are only out for sex. It's never a great idea to sleep with someone too soon. Those guys cooled off because they were looking for sex only. Find a guy who's truly interested in you and in having a relationship with you and you'll be fine. Don't lower your standards to appease people who have low standards.
somedude81 Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 I think Ocean is getting desperate about keeping a date around. I think she's starting to believe that her standards are too high and that the only way she can get the guys she really wants to is to have sex with them. Unfortunately it could potentially mean that her other needs are not going to be met.
xpaperxcutx Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 Yea, having sex early on is a great idea. That way, if you get to know the guy and decide you actually don't like him after all, you've set yourself up for a major break-up instead of just stopping dating him. Or you end up staying with him because it's just easier because you've made this physical committment with him. Or if you do like him, then you've proven that you don't think enough of yourself to believe that a guy would actually like you for who you are, and that you basically think that guys are only out for sex. It's never a great idea to sleep with someone too soon. Those guys cooled off because they were looking for sex only. Find a guy who's truly interested in you and in having a relationship with you and you'll be fine. Don't lower your standards to appease people who have low standards. That's the problem though. Ocean tends to fall for the guys who aren't all that interested. And the ones who like her, she tends to find fault with.
Insanitylater Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 And the ones who like her, she tends to find fault with. maybe in reality the ones that like her are also the ones that dont have sex with her quick enough, thus she thinks something is wrong
OliveOyl Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 While having sex on the first date is probably too soon, over in the Marriages forum, there are scores of threads of couples who have mismatched libidos, and someone always pipes up, "why did you get married if the sex wasn't good in the first place?" I do think that finding out if there is sexual chemistry is important early on. Why wait until a dozen dates to find out that your date is terrible in bed? And part of "who you are" is "who you are in bed." Sex is bonding and a core part of a relationship. It is not "icing" or a reward to be earned after you have accrued enough relationship points by waiting. It totally changes the flavor of a relationship and to go for a long time without engaging in any sexual activities means that you aren't yet in a position to evaluate the full potential of the relationship.
JungleLover Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 Yea, having sex early on is a great idea. That way, if you get to know the guy and decide you actually don't like him after all, you've set yourself up for a major break-up instead of just stopping dating him. Or you end up staying with him because it's just easier because you've made this physical committment with him. Or if you do like him, then you've proven that you don't think enough of yourself to believe that a guy would actually like you for who you are, and that you basically think that guys are only out for sex. It's never a great idea to sleep with someone too soon. Those guys cooled off because they were looking for sex only. Find a guy who's truly interested in you and in having a relationship with you and you'll be fine. Don't lower your standards to appease people who have low standards. Sex or not, it is not cool to just stop dating someone without some form of real explanation. I don't think sex really matters in this situation or complicates it more. Many people have one night stands and just never call the person back or answer their calls again including women. I think it is often a spurious correlation to believe that since a guy stopped wanting to see you after sex, it was because he finally got what he really wanted. Some people just won't accept that they were doing certain things to turn the person off in the first place or after the sex and sex still happened because either one or both of the people pushed it and the guy just still decided to leave. Men get attached after sex too but I don't think the ones that aren't high on a woman's interest list matters. It is only the ones that they really go crazy for and leave after sex that count. The guy that wanted to stay after he had sex doesn't get as much air play. I recently was dating a woman that had sex with me by the second date and it certainly peaked my interest in her. I wanted to continue to date her but she eventually lost interest seemingly out of nowhere. That situation is what brought me to LS. Is it because she got what she wanted and was no longer interested? Just because the timeline coincides doesn't give me the right to jump to that conclusion. I just accept that I will never no why she stopped wanting to date.
Jannah Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 While having sex on the first date is probably too soon, over in the Marriages forum, there are scores of threads of couples who have mismatched libidos, and someone always pipes up, "why did you get married if the sex wasn't good in the first place?" I do think that finding out if there is sexual chemistry is important early on. Why wait until a dozen dates to find out that your date is terrible in bed? And part of "who you are" is "who you are in bed." Sex is bonding and a core part of a relationship. It is not "icing" or a reward to be earned after you have accrued enough relationship points by waiting. It totally changes the flavor of a relationship and to go for a long time without engaging in any sexual activities means that you aren't yet in a position to evaluate the full potential of the relationship. This is a very realistic view. Having said that, I don't believe that one should act on every impulse and you should definitely be selective. When you do choose to have sex with someone, it should be mutually satisfying, not just viewed as a tool of some sort.
carhill Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 I wonder why so many stories on LS are relating people having sex and then disappearing or 'not wanting anything serious', etc, even though they remain quite content to continue having sex; sure seems like some folks are forgetting the bonding part, if sex is bonding and a core part of the relationship. Perhaps that aspect was relevant in my own shared story; that I hadn't bonded sufficiently at that early stage for the sex to be the impetus to a more committed monogamous relationship. I was drawn away by another interest and potential. Hard to know. Perhaps men and women think and feel differently about such subjects
Angel1111 Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 Sex is bonding and a core part of a relationship. Exactly. That's why a person - particularly women - needs to get to know the person before sleeping with them. I'm not talking about a long period of time but you need to know this person before getting naked with them.
xpaperxcutx Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 I wonder why so many stories on LS are relating people having sex and then disappearing or 'not wanting anything serious', etc, even though they remain quite content to continue having sex; sure seems like some folks are forgetting the bonding part, if sex is bonding and a core part of the relationship. Perhaps that aspect was relevant in my own shared story; that I hadn't bonded sufficiently at that early stage for the sex to be the impetus to a more committed monogamous relationship. I was drawn away by another interest and potential. Hard to know. Perhaps men and women think and feel differently about such subjects If both paticipating agree that sex is the only mutual reason that they're having sex to begin with, the act alone doesn't warrant a " bond". I don't think both gender feels any differently about this subject. The only exception is that women are catching up and replicating the same behavior that men has done- that it's okay to have sex without attachment.
Angel1111 Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 I wonder why so many stories on LS are relating people having sex and then disappearing or 'not wanting anything serious', etc, even though they remain quite content to continue having sex; sure seems like some folks are forgetting the bonding part, if sex is bonding and a core part of the relationship. Perhaps that aspect was relevant in my own shared story; that I hadn't bonded sufficiently at that early stage for the sex to be the impetus to a more committed monogamous relationship. I was drawn away by another interest and potential. Hard to know. Perhaps men and women think and feel differently about such subjects I don't think it's about someone disappearing or that we've forgotten about bonding. I think it has to do with the fact that having sex too soon into a relationshp skews things - whether the relationship would be good or bad. If the relationship wasn't going to work out anyway, then having sex too soon complicates things a LOT. If it was going to work out, then typically both people end up feeling like things are moving too quickly and wishing they had waited. It's rarely a good idea to sleep with someone too quickly.
Knittress Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 If both paticipating agree that sex is the only mutual reason that they're having sex to begin with, the act alone doesn't warrant a " bond". I don't think both gender feels any differently about this subject. The only exception is that women are catching up and replicating the same behavior that men has done- that it's okay to have sex without attachment. You imply that women are "catching up" as if the traditional female mindset towards sex and bonding is somehow backwards or behind. I'm not so down with that. I think it's great that people feel free and open to do as they like, but some people genuinely ARE wired a certain way and the societal message towards mandatory promiscuity is just setting them up for confusion and heartbreak.
threebyfate Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 Everyone can argue round and round in a circle but realistically speaking, we're talking about many different people with different values and triggers. Some bond with sex. Others don't. Some can have sex with any warm body. Others are more selective but still consider it a sport. Some use sex as an external validator or power tool. Others view it as something so wonderful, they won't share it with anyone except someone they seriously care about which includes huge components of relationship trust and respect. OG has to decide who she is before deciding what works best for herself. I don't agree with the way she minimalizes herself and maximizes men who appear to be low interest. At the same time, I wish she wouldn't minimalize men who are interested in her but I'm guessing this is an extension of self-minimalizing. "If they like me, they might not be so great".
carhill Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 I was exploring a prior poster's comments about sex and bonding and about how waiting for sex can 'waste' time if the parties find out, after waiting, that they are sexually incompatible. Interesting aspects to explore. Great information about compatibility, if the respective parties communicate clearly what their styles (sexual and bonding) are. Personally, I've found that having a style a bit different from the 'norm' of most men does limit potentials somewhat, effectively removing all women interested in casual sexual relationships from my dating pool. No rancor; I just find they self-select to opt out. Looks like a pretty common occurrence in my age group IME so far. I'll see how it goes. OP, you still reading here? What's your take on this?
Angel1111 Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 I was exploring a prior poster's comments about sex and bonding and about how waiting for sex can 'waste' time if the parties find out, after waiting, that they are sexually incompatible. Interesting aspects to explore. Great information about compatibility, if the respective parties communicate clearly what their styles (sexual and bonding) are. It's been my observation that even when people figure out that they're not really compatible sexually, they still end up marrying one another. I don't know if it's because they think things will change, or if it's because they have low expectations to start with - but based on what I read here, it seems to happen a lot. I believe that sex is a direct reflection of the health of the overall relationship. I'm guessing that if those people who are so incompatible sexually have huge issues somewhere else in the relationship.
Knittress Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 (edited) It's been my observation that even when people figure out that they're not really compatible sexually, they still end up marrying one another. I don't know if it's because they think things will change, or if it's because they have low expectations to start with - but based on what I read here, it seems to happen a lot. I believe that sex is a direct reflection of the health of the overall relationship. I'm guessing that if those people who are so incompatible sexually have huge issues somewhere else in the relationship. Not entirely disagreeing, but I think a discrepancy in sex drives and overall kinkiness levels is a very real thing - and not necessarily a reflection of the emotional intimacy of the couple. People can compensate for a time if they really love the person they're with, but sexual differences are not something that can be overlooked forever. I don't think it's due to low expectations or hoping their partner will change at all, but that lots of people try and fool THEMSELVES into thinking they don't need what they need. Edited October 18, 2010 by Knittress
sanskrit Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 I believe that sex is a direct reflection of the health of the overall relationship. I'm guessing that if those people who are so incompatible sexually have huge issues somewhere else in the relationship. Agree, but also disagree. For me, sexual compatibility is mostly a matter of consideration and communication unless dealing with a real outlier, not something that simply "is" or "is not." On my list, it's far and away the easiest thing to achieve in a relationship, with other more important things being much more difficult. Of course, we have all run into "outliers" in that department, but those outliers tend to find each other somehow.
Angel1111 Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 Not entirely disagreeing, but I think a discrepancy in sex drives and overall kinkiness levels is a very real thing - and not necessarily a reflection of the emotional intimacy of the couple. People can compensate for a time if they really love the person they're with, but sexual differences are not something that can be overlooked forever. I don't think it's due to low expectations or hoping their partner will change at all, but that lots of people try and fool THEMSELVES into thinking they don't need what they need. Yes, I think there's truth in what you and sanskrit are saying.
Author OceanGirl Posted October 18, 2010 Author Posted October 18, 2010 This is also true...and it didn't work out for the OP. Actually, his interest increased after sex. He called me 5 times the next day (previously he would contact me every few days or so). I decided to end it because I didn't feel that our personalities were compatible. It was only when I wrote him the break up e-mail and asked him what are his thoughts, he said that he had concerns that we don't have enough in common to last long term but that he wants to keep seeing me anyway. FYI he called yesterday and we are catching up soon (as friends I assume). Our break up had absolutely nothing to do with having sex in the car...
Star Gazer Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 Actually, his interest increased after sex. He called me 5 times the next day (previously he would contact me every few days or so). I could have predicted that response. Fact is, he told you he had doubts about your compatibility. So having sex with him earlier or later would have had no bearing on the success of that relationship. And I don't think initiating sex with him for the FIRST TIME in his car did you any favors.
Recommended Posts