Guys, do you respect women who have fbuddy relationships? Is that a "low-grade"chic?

[donnamaybe]

The reality is that a woman's sexual history is important to men looking for a potential wife. Apparently it is less important (or not important at all) to women looking for a husband. You can scream and lecture at people of the other gender and tell them that their feelings are wrong, or you can deal with reality. I suggest that the latter is more conducive to happiness.

Your reality, maybe. However, the type of man I wanted was the type who didn't hold double standards, and guess what? FOUND ONE! He knew all about my FWB prior to our dating. He's the kind of man with the ability to put things into a perspective of reality - not just the reality of men who are so insecure that they can't conceive of a woman having her own set of rules based on personal integrity and honesty, even when *FOR SHAME* sex with someone who is not a committed partner is concerned.

 

But, then again, my guy is well hung and a VERY considerate lover. I suppose that's why he lacks said insecurity.

[EasyHeart]

Actually, I cooked him dinners often and stuff. We were good friends. He just wouldn't make a good partner for me, and I wasn't interested in a relationship with ANYONE at the time anyway. That was 6 years ago.

We have been using a lot of terms loosely in this discussion -- "FWB", "F-buddy", "casual sex", etc. -- and it seems to me that many of us are using differing definitions of the terms. So let's start defining the terms and maybe the screaming will stop.

 

For instance, my definition of "FWB" is a purely sexual relationship with none of the trappings of dating, ie no hanging out together, no going places together, no mutual friends, no watching DVDs together on a Friday night, no sharing of experiences, etc. It does NOT include dating someone who you don't want to marry.

 

I've dated lots and lots of women who I didn't want to marry or 'get serious' with, mostly because I was young and busy with school/work, so LTRs were simply not on my radar. But we dated -- we did stuff together besides just have sex. We dated a few months or maybe a year, and then went our separate ways. But I never considered any of those women FWBs or F-buddies, and I'm sure I would have gotten a knee in the groin if I ever had (I usually referred to them as "my girlfriend"). They were just women I dated who I wasn't serious about.

 

So have at it, people: Define "FWB" or "F-buddy" or whatever term you please.

[EasyHeart]

Your reality, maybe. However, the type of man I wanted was the type who didn't hold double standards, and guess what? FOUND ONE! He knew all about my FWB prior to our dating. He's the kind of man with the ability to put things into a perspective of reality - not just the reality of men who are so insecure that they can't conceive of a woman having her own set of rules based on personal integrity and honesty, even when *FOR SHAME* sex with someone who is not a committed partner is concerned.

 

But, then again, my guy is well hung and a VERY considerate lover. I suppose that's why he lacks said insecurity.

Well, you're obviously insecure or ashamed about something, or else you wouldn't be so angry and you'd be capable of having a civil conversation without making a lot of personal attacks.

[donnamaybe]

Well, the reason I got into that FWB situation was because my last relationship ended on a note that made me kind of sick and tired of the whole relationship thing. I had met an old friend from way back, and we got together and played music a few times and had fun together. He knew where I was emotionally, and I also made sure he knew that, even if I were eventually ready to get involved with someone, that he just wasn't going to be more than a friend. After close to six months of no sex at all ('cause I'm just not into screwing around with whoever is willing and not hideous ) he called me one night when I was going out with the girls and told me I should come over on my way home. I reminded him I didn't want a R with him, but he said he didn't want one either. I told him, "Well, it has been awhile..." (for me, six months is a LONG time to go without sex ). So it was on. It was very convenient for me. We lived only about a mile and half away from each other, and we were friends. Unfortunately, like I said, he fell in love with me and I ended up hurting him which is why I vowed to never get into that kind of situation again. It wasn't because of some sort of perceived lack of respect for myself. After all, the whole thing was on my terms, and I hadn't lied to anyone. I just felt bad for him and didn't want to be the cause of that kind of pain for anyone else.

 

So - there's my FWB story. We agreed to no strings sex with each other only, unless one or the other of us became involved with someone else. Of course it would have been over then. You can't be forming a relationship with someone while having sex with someone else. At least, I can't.

[donnamaybe]

Well, you're obviously insecure or ashamed about something, or else you wouldn't be so angry and you'd be capable of having a civil conversation without making a lot of personal attacks.

Personal attacks? Um, I think you should go back and re-read your posts about how women who take charge of their own sexuality are "acting like men" and other such rubbish.

 

Angry? Not at all. Mildly amused and slightly disgusted at the narrow mindedness and the double standards of some? Yup. Someone with that kind of mindset is incapable of making me angry. I have to care about their opinion first.

 

I will, however, point out the logical flaws in their "thinking."

[donnamaybe]

For a woman, six months without sex should be nothing.

Not this woman. And my man is VERY happy about my sex drive.

[EasyHeart]

Well, the reason I got into that FWB situation was because my last relationship ended on a note that made me kind of sick and tired of the whole relationship thing. I had met an old friend from way back, and we got together and played music a few times and had fun together. He knew where I was emotionally, and I also made sure he knew that, even if I were eventually ready to get involved with someone, that he just wasn't going to be more than a friend. After close to six months of no sex at all ('cause I'm just not into screwing around with whoever is willing and not hideous ) he called me one night when I was going out with the girls and told me I should come over on my way home. I reminded him I didn't want a R with him, but he said he didn't want one either. I told him, "Well, it has been awhile..." (for me, six months is a LONG time to go without sex ). So it was on. It was very convenient for me. We lived only about a mile and half away from each other, and we were friends. Unfortunately, like I said, he fell in love with me and I ended up hurting him which is why I vowed to never get into that kind of situation again. It wasn't because of some sort of perceived lack of respect for myself. After all, the whole thing was on my terms, and I hadn't lied to anyone. I just felt bad for him and didn't want to be the cause of that kind of pain for anyone else.

 

So - there's my FWB story. We agreed to no strings sex with each other only, unless one or the other of us became involved with someone else. Of course it would have been over then. You can't be forming a relationship with someone while having sex with someone else. At least, I can't.

And I would definitely not call that kind of situation a "FWB". I would call that a casual relationship.

 

I still think a lot of the hostility in this thread is because of people using different definitions. I think most men are thinking of "FWB" as NSA sex; I think most women are thinking of it as a casual relationship. There is a huge difference between the two.

 

Anyone else want to offer a definition? There's no right or wrong answer.

 

Related question: Is there a 'statue of limitations' on a person's romantic/sexual history? Do you care what someone did 20 years ago? 10? 5? 2? 3 months? For me it's roughly 5 years. I don't care about what happened before then unless it still affects you (eg, child, ex-husband, stalker, disease).

[EasyHeart]

Personal attacks? Um, I think you should go back and re-read your posts about how women who take charge of their own sexuality are "acting like men" and other such rubbish.

 

Angry? Not at all. Mildly amused and slightly disgusted at the narrow mindedness and the double standards of some? Yup. Someone with that kind of mindset is incapable of making me angry. I have to care about their opinion first.

 

I will, however, point out the logical flaws in their "thinking."

I think there's a pretty big difference between criticizing the influence of a particular school of feminist thought and saying that anyone who disagrees with me is insecure and has a small penis. No?

[donnamaybe]

And I would definitely not call that kind of situation a "FWB". I would call that a casual relationship.

Well, because we had the "talk" about entering into the sex part of it and knowing full well it wouldn't lead to a relationship other than mere friends, I considered it FWB. This was a "friendship" wherein I gained more "benefits" than a friendship would imply.

 

That's the reasoning for my definition of FWB.

[bac]

 

The reality is that a woman's sexual history is important to men looking for a potential wife. Apparently it is less important (or not important at all) to women looking for a husband. You can scream and lecture at people of the other gender and tell them that their feelings are wrong, or you can deal with reality. I suggest that the latter is more conducive to happiness.

 

You can get to know a woman's sexual history only from what she would tell you. That is why it is irrelevant to consider the history as reality. Most mature women are aware of men's expectations and men's way of thinking about the history. Therefore, they know what is the right way to present themselves.

[Woggle]

I don't think that women who have casual sex should be jailed or stoned or persecuted because this is a free country but a woman who does not value long term commitment is not a good candidate for a wife or a partner. To me it is obvious. Men have the right to our standards and this is how we weed out the women who would make horrible long term partners.

 

You can call men like this close minded but we aren't the ones getting cheated on and left and right and having our wives walk out on us when they get bored of marriage. This is what a man gets when he marries a woman who tries to transition from a woman who sleeps around to a faithful wife.

[EasyHeart]

Well, because we had the "talk" about entering into the sex part of it and knowing full well it wouldn't lead to a relationship other than mere friends, I considered it FWB. This was a "friendship" wherein I gained more "benefits" than a friendship would imply.

 

That's the reasoning for my definition of FWB.

And of course, you can call it whatever you want. But it's not what I would call an FWB situation, and (whatever it's labeled) I doubt many men would have any problem with that kind of situation in a woman's past.

 

There's no right or wrong definition. But I think the majority of disagreements (and especially the hostility) in this thread would go away if we were all talking about the same thing.

[donnamaybe]

And of course, you can call it whatever you want. But it's not what I would call an FWB situation, and (whatever it's labeled) I doubt many men would have any problem with that kind of situation in a woman's past.

 

There's no right or wrong definition. But I think the majority of disagreements (and especially the hostility) in this thread would go away if we were all talking about the same thing.

Oh, yeah. MOST men would have a problem with it because, in my scenario, the woman was calling the shots. Not that I tried to make it so, but it turned out that way.

 

So because there of NSA sex that's an FWB? There was also NSA sex in my situation, but there was also friendship - you know, the F part of FWB. I know lots of people who have casual sexual relationships involving NSA sex, but no friendship.

[EasyHeart]

I don't think that women who have casual sex should be jailed or stoned or persecuted because this is a free country but a woman who does not value long term commitment is not a good candidate for a wife or a partner. To me it is obvious. Men have the right to our standards and this is how we weed out the women who would make horrible long term partners.

 

You can call men like this close minded but we aren't the ones getting cheated on and left and right and having our wives walk out on us when they get bored of marriage. This is what a man gets when he marries a woman who tries to transition from a woman who sleeps around to a faithful wife.

I think I agree with you, but what does "casual sex" mean? Does it apply to any sexual relationship that isn't headed towards marriage? If I'm not interested in a relationship potentially leading to marriage (because I'm too young, too busy, emotionally unavailable) and I have a short-term (eg 6-12 month) relationship with someone, is that "casual sex"?

[donnamaybe]

Oh, yeah. That's right. Men NEVER cheat on women.

[stillafool]

Great post Leigh!

 

I had an FWB situation with a guy once - at his suggestion. I won't do that again because it led to him wanting more, and I hurt him terribly. Lost a friend too. So much for "it's only because the gal can't get someone better."

 

And, by the way, I now have someone better.

 

This is an excellent point. Lots of times it is the man who wants more from the FWB/casual sex relationship than the woman. Sorry, but I've heard plenty of women talk of how they had great sex with a guy they didn't want a relatinship with and complain that now he is getting too clingy.

 

I think both sexes are subject to wanting more out of a casual sex and FWBs relationship. Not just the woman.

[EasyHeart]

Oh, yeah. MOST men would have a problem with it because, in my scenario, the woman was calling the shots. Not that I tried to make it so, but it turned out that way.

Wow, that is a really, really big leap. We obviously do not know the same men!

 

So because there of NSA sex that's an FWB? There was also NSA sex in my situation, but there was also friendship - you know, the F part of FWB. I know lots of people who have casual sexual relationships involving NSA sex, but no friendship.

Like I said, there's no right or wrong definitions. I gave my definition in an earlier post, and that is the way I have been using FWB on this forum. You have obviously been using a different definition. Others may have been using mine, or yours, or something completely different.

 

I think this is an interesting and useful discussion, but there is no point in having a "discussion" about completely different things. That's why I'm curious about how people are using the term.

[donnamaybe]

Wow, that is a really, really big leap. We obviously do not know the same men!

You've only been on LS for 426 posts.

[stillafool]

What really dissapoints me, is how narrow some of these posters minds are. Why do respectable women have to want long term relationships? Why is a long term, seroious relationship the only " respectable" aspiration for women?

 

I like and respect myself as a person. I have a good life plan ahead of me, career wise, and also on a personal level. I am a good person, who has goals and standards as to how I treat people, and how I allow myself to be treated.

 

I DO want a " respectable" life for myself. I want to get a good job, give to charity, help the community, and also be a ambitious, fun, humerous, and interesting human being.

 

However, I do not see how wanting a long term, monogomous, SERIOUS relationship, is a critiera for a women to be considered " respectable", either as a partner, or as a person in general.

 

I dress well, I am, well spoken, I am affable, and I also would not cheat on a long term partner of mine. However, I do not want or aspire to having a long term SEIROUS relationship, with the same person, for many years ( or for LIFE). I am not ruling out ever craving a long term parrtner, but for the time being, I am looking for a more casual type of sexual relationship, and THIS DOES not make me any lesser of a person then ANY OF YOU.

 

I cannot believe how judgmental people are being, not to mention the assumptions that are being made, about women like MYSELF, who believe that mutual masturbation with a person that likes you and respects youa s a person, IS WRONG?

 

Here is the thing; IT MAY BE WRONG FOR YOU. But there are respectable people, who would make GREAT wives or partners, whome have RESPECTABLE Loves, and WHO DO NOT " sleep around" with many men; there are women LIKE THAT who are RESPECTABLE.

 

You could meat the women of your dreams,and fall in love with who she is as a person; her humour, wit, intelligense, strength determination. THis women could also have had FWB or casual sex type of relationships. You would never have known - because not all women who have casual sex necessarily sleep around a lot. They just have sex occasionally, and they wait until the RIGHT guy comes up for the position; a guy with the right chemistry, with whome they desire to have sex with.

 

I certainly did not settle for just ANY guy to have sex with. I waited about 5 years without sex, then met a guy by chance who I had good chemistry with, and who was ridiculously good looking. I have a HIGH SEX DRIVE, and yet I waited until the right guy came along to satisfy my sexual urge.

 

I would never feel okay about giving my body up, to a guy who I did not feel comfortable with. The chemistry has to be right, and I have to WANT the guy sexually. Life wise, he has to want me just as badly.

 

Leigh there is absolutely nothing wrong with the way you are. Posters here are overly judgmental of these relationships because of the pain they have suffered. What you are hearing is FEAR. The world is changing and roles for men and women are in the process of being redefined. As with any change there is pain and struggle involved. You WILL have everything you want.

[EasyHeart]

This is an excellent point. Lots of times it is the man who wants more from the FWB/casual sex relationship than the woman. Sorry, but I've heard plenty of women talk of how they had great sex with a guy they didn't want a relatinship with and complain that now he is getting too clingy.

 

I think both sexes are subject to wanting more out of a casual sex and FWBs relationship. Not just the woman.

In that case, do you think they were really FWBs, or did they just miscommunicate? Or maybe one of them lied or mislead the other?

 

I'll bet if we talked to people like this, one would say, "Yeah, we were FWBs" and the other would say "We dated, but he/she wouldn't commit".

[EasyHeart]

You've only been on LS for 426 posts.

What does that have to do with whether we know the same men?

[stillafool]

For a woman, six months without sex should be nothing.

 

Sexist mode ON.

 

Yeah, remember that when your wife doesn't want sex for 6 months and you come to LS complaining that "her sex drive is too low, what's wrong."

 

This is interesting that some men feel a woman should be able to go without sex for long periods of time and not be bothered;but yet they want this woman to turn into a sex kitten when she gets with them. :lmao:The contradictions are just ridiculous!

[donnamaybe]

What does that have to do with whether we know the same men?

You haven't read the posts by the double standard brigade on here apparently.

[stillafool]

In that case, do you think they were really FWBs, or did they just miscommunicate? Or maybe one of them lied or mislead the other?

 

I'll bet if we talked to people like this, one would say, "Yeah, we were FWBs" and the other would say "We dated, but he/she wouldn't commit".

 

No, their relationships were as I described.

[stillafool]

You can get to know a woman's sexual history only from what she would tell you. That is why it is irrelevant to consider the history as reality. Most mature women are aware of men's expectations and men's way of thinking about the history. Therefore, they know what is the right way to present themselves.

 

 

Exactly!:)