Having sex early is better

[Mme. Chaucer]

 

But, where I seem to be failing is with turning dating into a relationship. I feel that after going to the movies and to dinners and repeat x times, the only way to build more intimacy is to have sleep-overs (and involve sex). Maybe that would push things towards the realtionship rather than just dating.

 

When you have sex with a guy you're dating is not going to address this issue in any way.

 

I feel that I lack the ability to form a solid conection with anyone and am wondering if sex would help. Before sex, I am really stiff and awkward and overly polite. I only start to relax and be myself after sex is out of the way.

 

There was a thread of yours a while back where you bemoaned this characteristic of yours ... I think you'd become physical (don't remember if the actual deed was done) in order to push forward the intimacy, and it didn't work, leading you to the "is he just using me for ..." circuit.

 

With the way I act on the first few dates, it is pretty unlikely that ANY guy would start falling for me.

 

Well, if a guy does "start falling" for you, or you for him, is not so key. Of course it has to happen as the first step into a real relationship, but the following parts are the MOST key.

 

All I consistently get from your threads is that you are trying to maneuver every guy with a vestige of boyfriend potential into "falling for" you. In this thread, you say that you need to switch it up so YOU become the sought after prize.

 

Both are wrong. It's two people getting together and seeing where it goes. Your decision about whether early sex is "better" or not needs to be made from a good place. I mean, you need to learn and deeply understand what is right for YOU. Calculating and using sex as a tool for getting what you are looking for is not going to work for you. I know it has and can work for some types of people ... not for someone like yourself, who will proceed to obsess, etc.

 

For the record, I believe that if you decided that you would be having sex on the third date, or any such rote program in order to achieve your desired goal (to have a guy fall in love with you) it would be just as ill fated as arbitrarily deciding "early sex is better."

[Quest]

I have always waited for a while to have sex with a new guy. At least around a month or so of dating and I think it has been working against me. Usually there will be a third date where things get more sexual and invite to sleep over at my or his place will hang in the air. Usually, I would just ignore it and go home (alone). I would notice a guy cool off considerably after that moment. It has become a pattern. .

 

My feeling would be that if he disappears after you 'refuse' sex after three dates then it would never have become a long-term thing anyway. He was more interested in the sex than you.

 

I now wonder if I had let things progress naturally if the outcome of my raltionships would have been different. I think that men also experience some level of bonding and attachment after sex. Especially if sex is good and you spend the night together, wake up together have breakfast etc. It can increase intimacy and closeness and that is where I have been falling short.

 

ALL of my male friends and my brother have had their current long terms girlfriends sleep with them within the first 3 dates.

 

This isn't logical. Just because they had sex after three dates and they are still in long-term relationships it doesn't mean to say it's BECAUSE they had sex after three dates. It's probably more that these men respect the women they are with for who they are and it was never a case of when they had sex being the issue. Surely two adults can have sex early or sex after six months and still have a decent long-term relationship either way. It's about what suits that couple and if you respect another person you won't drop them because they need longer before sex than you do. Likewise if you need longer than them if they're truly into YOU that should be something they can deal with.

 

Basically, I feel that a guy with options is likely to start looking for alternatives if sex comes too late.

 

Not if he's really into you and you can talk about it.

 

Delaying sex may work for women who are super-confident unattainable goddesses but is not really working for me.

 

Again,it's not what works for 'you', it's what works for you as a couple, IMO. You need to be able to trust someone enough and have enough confidence in yourself that you can state what you need. If the relationship is going to work the other person surely will try to respond to that and you can work it out together.

[greenwood]

I don't think it is very smart to delay sex on the purpose of delaying sex, I mean, if a woman is already thinking about when should she have sex with a guy she's dating, it already indicates something is not right.

By the way, there is a book by George Weinberg on the topic, and yes, he argues it is actually better to have sex early. I know it sounds weird, but it really made me think the question over, because I used to be one of those girls who said there are so many things more important than sex, like getting to know each other etc. But now I believe that by delaying sex you are actually making a very big deal out of it, and since it should be the most natural thing between two people, it should come naturally.

[OliveOyl]

I can see if you are in your teens or early 20s you might want to wait.

However if you are not overly religious and/or over 30 waiting a month or more to have sex (if you are dating regularly) seems way overkill.

 

Falling in lust doesn't prevent someone from falling in love. I don't think sex gets in the way at all. Getting to know him on the inside includes him getting to know *you* on the inside. Pun intended.

 

I base all this from experience.... my marriage... my STBX and I were very compatible. We shared the same or similar values, were great friends, got along great.

 

Except the sex was just "so-so". Because everything else was great, I assumed that either a) sex really wasn't that important at all or b) it would improve over time. I was wrong on both counts.

[LittleTiger]

I don't think it is very smart to delay sex on the purpose of delaying sex, I mean, if a woman is already thinking about when should she have sex with a guy she's dating, it already indicates something is not right.

By the way, there is a book by George Weinberg on the topic, and yes, he argues it is actually better to have sex early. I know it sounds weird, but it really made me think the question over, because I used to be one of those girls who said there are so many things more important than sex, like getting to know each other etc. But now I believe that by delaying sex you are actually making a very big deal out of it, and since it should be the most natural thing between two people, it should come naturally.

 

Of course it comes naturally. It comes naturally to all creatures in the animal kingdom......but presumably, other than swans etc, most of them aren't looking for lifetime partners.

 

To me there are two types of sex:

 

1) Casual sex - just sex, NSA, all for fun

2) Relationship sex - about emotional and physical connection, love and intimacy

 

I've had both. I make no judgement on the former but personally I prefer the latter. I'm not really interested in casual sex.

 

For relationship sex to take place there has to be a relationship in the first place. Therefore, there has to be some level of emotional bond BEFORE you have sex. It isn't making a big deal of it to wait until you both feel that emotional bond - it could be a few days, a few weeks or a few months - who knows, it doesn't matter what the time frame is. The point is that the emotional bond turns casual sex into relationship sex so, unless casual sex is what you're after, it's better to wait.

[Gattica]

I agree. I think when girls prolong the sex thing at the start they are only shooting themselves in the foot. Especially if the guy has a lot of options. Think about it, he could hang out with you, and you're cool and all, but wait a month to have sex. Or he could hang out with another girl whose prehaps a little less cool, but he can have sex now.

 

Well, then that would tell me his main goal was getting sex. There is no way I would ever have sex to keep a guy...that is a ridiculous thing to do. Why would I want to be with a guy who is going after several women at once and which ever woman "bites" first...is the one he will keep?

 

I don't see how waiting a month...30 days...is a long period of time, ESPECIALLY if you have just met the person.

 

People are in a such a hurry in life and want instant gratification. No thank you.

 

How insecure are people that if someone doesn't sleep with them by date 3 or by the end of month 1, that they assume the other person isn't interested in them? If you TALK to the person and also take note on how they treat you...you can know whether or not they are interested in you in a sexual manner.

[LittleTiger]

I can see if you are in your teens or early 20s you might want to wait.

However if you are not overly religious and/or over 30 waiting a month or more to have sex (if you are dating regularly) seems way overkill.

 

Falling in lust doesn't prevent someone from falling in love. I don't think sex gets in the way at all. Getting to know him on the inside includes him getting to know *you* on the inside. Pun intended.

 

I base all this from experience.... my marriage... my STBX and I were very compatible. We shared the same or similar values, were great friends, got along great.

 

Except the sex was just "so-so". Because everything else was great, I assumed that either a) sex really wasn't that important at all or b) it would improve over time. I was wrong on both counts.

 

My marriage was the same and my desire to have sex with my ex came mostly from my love for him - from the emotional intimacy we shared. I certainly don't regret marrying him just because the sex wasn't smoking hot. Sexual compatibility is important in a marriage, but emotional connection, intimacy and communication is even more important. I'd prefer to make sure all of that was in place first (on both sides) before I get physically intimate with someone.

 

I wouldn't give a virtual stranger my new smartphone or 72 inch TV to play with in case he stole it or didn't look after it properly, why would I give him the most important thing I have - myself.

 

I'm not suggesting any given timeframe for waiting - just whenever the level of emotional intimacy feels right.

[GoodOnPaper]

How insecure are people that if someone doesn't sleep with them by date 3 or by the end of month 1, that they assume the other person isn't interested in them? If you TALK to the person and also take note on how they treat you...you can know whether or not they are interested in you in a sexual manner.

 

In 1 month, I would have landed in the friendzone many times over.

[Floridaman]

Dunno about this. I think it's the opposite actually. Aside from one instance, where I was already unavailable to the guy because of long distance issues, whenever I had sex with a guy early on he wasn't interested in a relationship with me. All of the times I've held off, where I was interested in a relationship with a guy, he was also interested.

That's probably accurate. Going too fast, you look "too easy" for either side.

[Holding-On]

In 1 month, I would have landed in the friendzone many times over.

 

This is what I was thinking. Do men (are you a man GoodOnPaper? I am too lazy to try and figure that out) feel they are getting friendzoned and move on?

[OceanGirl]

It is not that guys dump me if I don't have sex in 3 dates. It's just that I can see that their excitement in seeing me really takes a nose dive after they walk me home and hint at coming in and I ignore the hint.

 

At that moment, I start resisting natural flow of events. At that moment, they start feeling less excited about me and more inclined at looking at other options.

 

Now imagine if I went with the flow, they spent the night, we have a good time and they go home happy the next day. I can see how the connection gets stronger that way.

 

Other than that, it just feels silly that at 31, after a heavy make out session I pull away (like I am 15 year old virgin or something). It just seems unnatural and like game playing.

[LittleTiger]

It is not that guys dump me if I don't have sex in 3 dates. It's just that I can see that their excitement in seeing me really takes a nose dive after they walk me home and hint at coming in and I ignore the hint.

 

At that moment, I start resisting natural flow of events. At that moment, they start feeling less excited about me and more inclined at looking at other options.

 

Now imagine if I went with the flow, they spent the night, we have a good time and they go home happy the next day. I can see how the connection gets stronger that way.

 

Other than that, it just feels silly that at 31, after a heavy make out session I pull away (like I am 15 year old virgin or something). It just seems unnatural and like game playing.

 

If a guy's excitement at being with me nose dived because I said no to sex I'd assume sex was all he was interested in......and why do you ignore the hint - that is game playing. Tell him straight - I had a great night thanks, but I'm not ready to have sex with you yet, I prefer to take things slow. You're 31, if you can't talk straight with a guy you certainly shouldn't be getting naked with him.

 

Please don't kid yourself that by having sex with someone you can 'create' feelings that aren't there. If he likes you he'll wait until you're ready, however long that is (within reason) but you have to be up front with him. If you keep saying no without any explanation he'll just assume you're not that into him and will start looking elsewhere.

[carhill]

IME, when one waits longer to make love sexually, there is still progression of intimacy but it occurs in smaller increments with perhaps longer plateaus.

 

TBH, OP, I wouldn't be having (or initiating, as a man) 'heavy makeout sessions' in private unless we were going to be making love. Physical affection, sure, but nothing involving our genitals. I was the same way back when I was your age. Managed to 'make out' plenty and remain a virgin until 35 or so; just a different kind of 'making out' than you're speaking of.

 

My opinion, hard won by my mistakes in marriage, is that you worry too much about how the men will act or feel based on your actions. You're projecting potentials onto them with no basis in reality. Each man is unique, just as you are unique. Go with *your* flow. If that matches up with the man, then great. If not, not. Next.

[dispatch3d]

It is not that guys dump me if I don't have sex in 3 dates. It's just that I can see that their excitement in seeing me really takes a nose dive after they walk me home and hint at coming in and I ignore the hint.

 

At that moment, I start resisting natural flow of events. At that moment, they start feeling less excited about me and more inclined at looking at other options.

 

Now imagine if I went with the flow, they spent the night, we have a good time and they go home happy the next day. I can see how the connection gets stronger that way.

 

Other than that, it just feels silly that at 31, after a heavy make out session I pull away (like I am 15 year old virgin or something). It just seems unnatural and like game playing.

 

You're seeing this as too black and white I think. I really agree with the rest of your sentiments, but you seem to be looking at it as either you have sex or you don't. There's some inbetween stuff you can do. Play flirty, tease a little, give a little then take a step back, etc. You don't wanna throw yourself all at once at a guy. Where's the fun in that?

[dispatch3d]

If a guy's excitement at being with me nose dived because I said no to sex I'd assume sex was all he was interested in......and why do you ignore the hint - that is game playing. Tell him straight - I had a great night thanks, but I'm not ready to have sex with you yet, I prefer to take things slow. You're 31, if you can't talk straight with a guy you certainly shouldn't be getting naked with him.

 

Please don't kid yourself that by having sex with someone you can 'create' feelings that aren't there. If he likes you he'll wait until you're ready, however long that is (within reason) but you have to be up front with him. If you keep saying no without any explanation he'll just assume you're not that into him and will start looking elsewhere.

 

assuming they are just looking for sex is a fear you have. They probably withdraw because they feel unwanted. I know in those scenarios that's how I feel. As in, oh I guess she doesnt actually like me.....

[Knittress]

assuming they are just looking for sex is a fear you have. They probably withdraw because they feel unwanted. I know in those scenarios that's how I feel. As in, oh I guess she doesnt actually like me.....

 

Right, so, not to totally threadjack - how can a girl who wants to minimize the hurt-potential by getting to know a guy before sleeping with him AVOID this reaction from a man?

[Titania22]

 

If you have sex too early, you fall in lust - hence the reason some guys on here have said they become more interested, not less. If the sex is good, a guy will hang around until he's bored. Which might be a while, even a very long while, but if it's just lust you can guarantee it will happen sometime. The same might happen to you too. Too many people base their relationships on lust and think that's what love is. They couldn't be more wrong.

 

 

This is cool. I never thought of it like that.

[carhill]

Right, so, not to totally threadjack - how can a girl who wants to minimize the hurt-potential by getting to know a guy before sleeping with him AVOID this reaction from a man?

How about clear communication about sex and expectations? One potential

[dispatch3d]

Right, so, not to totally threadjack - how can a girl who wants to minimize the hurt-potential by getting to know a guy before sleeping with him AVOID this reaction from a man?

 

You don't have to have sex with a guy to make it obvious/apparent/whatever to him you want him. You could kiss him, slap his ass, be accepting, etc.

 

Hell, I was out drinking saturday night with some friends of mine. One of the guys got pissed off because he thought some dude kicked him out of his house for being too drunk. He turned to walk home and I asked where he was going. I then told him if you truly love something if you let them go, they willc ome back. Bam the guy felt accepted and that we wanted him around - so he stuck around. Mind you he was still upset at the other dude. Lol ahhh I'm not gay so.... yeah.....

 

The point is guys just need reassurance that you want them around. Acceptance is one of the key things they look for. Another good example is some girl started (jokingly) telling me the "best pickuplines" she ever heard. I ended up leaving despite the fact it seemed like she liked me......

 

I didn't feel wanted, so I left. She did the opposite of what she needed to do......

[Titania22]

 

My opinion, hard won by my mistakes in marriage, is that you worry too much about how the men will act or feel based on your actions. You're projecting potentials onto them with no basis in reality. Each man is unique, just as you are unique. Go with *your* flow. If that matches up with the man, then great. If not, not. Next.

 

I agree with this.

[Titania22]

Right, so, not to totally threadjack - how can a girl who wants to minimize the hurt-potential by getting to know a guy before sleeping with him AVOID this reaction from a man?

 

By communicating with him, and reassuring him of her interest.

[dispatch3d]

Another good counter example. A guy and a girl were basically bantering back and forth about sex topics. She was getting pretty damn into it tbh. Anyhow, at some point she must have seemed not that into him. So he started asking her if she wanted a drink, my friend makes a lot of money, blablabla. At that point the guy needed some kinda clear sign she was actually into him (and not just playin around). She refused the drink (final straw, and I actually knew when he asked that she would refuse the drink but not because she didn't like him), and the guy just got up and left. Luckily one of his friends orchastrated a pool game. No idea how that one ended.....

[Eclypse]

Me and my girlfriend waited 2 months. We were both virgins though. I dunno what it's like for older people. It just seemed right. We even set a date for it, right after my trip ended. The anticipation nearly killed me.. Lol,

[LittleTiger]

How about clear communication about sex and expectations? One potential

 

carhill, you're my LS hero!

[Kamille]

I believe you don't want anyone to get close to you unless they've demonstrated they are worthy of your trust. That's why you focus so hard on trying to "make guys fall for you". You're exploring different ways in which you can get reassurance before you allow yourself to open up. And even then, you are so dead set against allowing someone to truly get to know you, that once someone demonstrates interest, you back out by finding problems with the person.

 

The questions are: what do you need in order to allow yourself to open up to guys? Why is letting someone get to know you so scary?

 

What do you need in order to start trusting your own instincts as to when to have sex, rather than trying to approach the question from a "law of averages" perspective? As you see from this thread, different men have different experiences when it comes to when to have sex. Approaching the situation from the outside won't help you. You have to find what is right for you.

 

The moment when you have sex is irrelevant because you're still putting the horse before the cart. As has been pointed out by Ms. Chaucer, dating is about two people getting to know each other. That's when intimacy starts happening. The kind of sex that you want, the kind that's relationship-building, is an extension of that.

 

 

Point by point analysis:

 

It is not that guys dump me if I don't have sex in 3 dates. It's just that I can see that their excitement in seeing me really takes a nose dive after they walk me home and hint at coming in and I ignore the hint.

 

If my memory serves me right, this isn't true of all the guys you date. It would only apply to the guys you're interested in. Not to mention, you have a tendency to focus on assessing interest levels and "protecting" yourself by predicting negative outcomes. This makes me think your belief that "you can see their excitement take an nose dive" is a distortion.

 

At that moment, I start resisting natural flow of events. At that moment, they start feeling less excited about me and more inclined at looking at other options.

 

I believe you start resisting the natural flow of events when your own interest peaks. That's when you try to "protect" yourself by trying to "make them fall for you". Perhaps the doorstep is the moment when they realize they have no idea who you are because you play your cards close to your chest.

 

Now imagine if I went with the flow, they spent the night, we have a good time and they go home happy the next day. I can see how the connection gets stronger that way.

 

Going with the flow means learning how to build intimacy before you have a clear sign that they're interested in you. I truly believe this is your biggest challenge: the trick is to allow yourself to reveal yourself to your dates as you get to know each other. This can be done outside the bedroom. It means allowing yourself to be vulnerable.

 

 

Other than that, it just feels silly that at 31, after a heavy make out session I pull away (like I am 15 year old virgin or something). It just seems unnatural and like game playing.

 

Yes, because you are playing games. You're not letting these men get to know you, so games is all you have left. You would still be playing games if you had sex early in the hopes of "increasing his interest level".

 

You're not allowing these men to get to know you. What's more, you seem reluctant to trust your own instincts, be yourself and see where things go. I can't figure out why that would be.

Edited October 19, 2010 by Kamille