zengirl Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 You just described me in the bolded part. I know we've gotten off topic, but I wanted to say no one HAS to be constantly busy. I’m very busy because what’s the alternative? Hanging out at home with a book and my dog. This is fine on occasion, but I choose to be on the go constantly—I check in at home throughout the day to see my dog, but I’m busy from first thing in the morning until late at night many days. I won’t get home today until after 9:30 pm today and I won’t even have time to make it to the gym. I rarely say no when invited to social functions. If I know someone, anyone going anywhere, I will probably go, and often I'm trying to do three different activities in one night (and I still don’t meet anyone suitable for dating!). If I met someone I wanted to hang out with, I would suddenly get a lot less busy. Guaranteed. And when I don’t I want to hang out with someone, I’m very good at convincing even myself that I’m too busy. Exactly. A decent woman isn't just going to be sitting around waiting for your call or anything, so there may be some "planning" involved. I guess even my BF has to "book" me to a degree because I'm not turning down plans to sit around in case he wants to do something, but it's not like he has to hunt me down. Just text, "Hey, you free?" or if he wants to make sure I am free, "Hey, lets make dinner Tuesday." The end. This is not complicated. If a woman is too busy ALL the time, she doesn't like you. Now, there are times when I get really busy because my work cycles, so I'll say, "Hey, I'm not going to be available much during such-and-such" but that's everyone's life, I think, sometimes.
thatone Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 (edited) Exactly. A decent woman isn't just going to be sitting around waiting for your call or anything, so there may be some "planning" involved. they did in my early 20s, because most people didn't have cell phones. if you wanted a man you gave your number to to call, you had to get the call which means you had to stay home a night or two. if she answered the phone it was a demonstration of interest on her part that she was in fact waiting for you to call. again, to reiterate my former point, put yourself in a man's shoes. for men it's a numbers game, they have to approach every woman they find attractive, and even if they do well with that they're only gonna get contact beyond that first conversation with a handful of them. then they eliminate most of the handful who did respond positively because of some other incompatibility, and after all of that effort, if they're left with a needy/clingy one and one that doesn't have time to do anything until the middle of next week, the needy/clingy one gets the nod. what we're then left with is the admittedly better prospect wondering why she can't find a man and the needy/clingy one getting someone above her pay grade just because she was more available. You just described me in the bolded part. I know we've gotten off topic, but I wanted to say no one HAS to be constantly busy. yeah, but, be honest. how easy is it to simply fall back into that busy schedule as an excuse when a man does or says something that you don't like, rather than talk about the issue in question and try to sort it out? that happens way too often. for the information age, people sure don't exchange as much information as they used to. Edited July 19, 2011 by thatone
Sanman Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 / yeah, but, be honest. how easy is it to simply fall back into that busy schedule as an excuse when a man does or says something that you don't like, rather than talk about the issue in question and try to sort it out? that happens way too often. for the information age, people sure don't exchange as much information as they used to. This I strongly agree with from my experiences. It has been much easier for the buys women I have dated to become busy again and let the relationship go downhill than it has to be honest and forthright.
zengirl Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 they did in my early 20s, because most people didn't have cell phones. if you wanted a man you gave your number to to call, you had to get the call which means you had to stay home a night or two. if she answered the phone it was a demonstration of interest on her part that she was in fact waiting for you to call. My mother dated (after divorce) before cell phones*, and she never sat around waiting for a guy to call. She was quite sought after and married again within two years to an excellent man. *We had an answering machine. Perhaps in the days before answering machines, but that depends how old you are, I guess. We had an answering machine when I was born (a little before actually) in the 80s. I imagine if timing were an issue, the busy woman would say, "Call me on Tuesday. I'll be in." And if he called on Wednesday? Oh well. He obviously wasn't that interested. I just don't buy that women should pause their lives indefinitely to show interest to a man in any era. The kind of guy that you normally want isn't exactly looking for a woman who sits around waiting for his call with no life of her own IMO.
Sanman Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 It's not "using" someone if you say honestly going in what you want and they agree to it. That's a mutual decision to keep a relationship on a certain level. Totally different. We'll have to disagree on this point. I think that if you know or are fairly sure someone has deeper feelings for you and you are using them for fwb or sex, you are using them. That they agree to be used does not really make it much better. It is always about the person with the upper hand taking advantage. I had a friend who slept with his ex after he dumped her because she wanted him back...he was dating other women and stated he did not want her back, but is that really fair to her? She couldn't let go an just say no. If your boss asks for a favor and says you don't have to do it, it is really no pressure? I know a couple where the guy is inheriting a huge trust fund and decided to take of and travel for a year. The gf has to stay in school and is unhappy about being apart. However she is easier to replace than he is. In all of these cases, it the person with the upper hand is taking advantage of the situation/ their position.
carhill Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 LOL, when I started dating we had a rotary dial phone with CLinter-7955 for a phone number and an operator for long distance. Either you called the girl or drove by her house. Back then it wasn't uncommon to show up unannounced at people's houses. Everyone seemed more friendly and less busy back then. Of course, gas with 30 cents per gallon
oaks Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 My mother dated (after divorce) before cell phones*, I remember a time before cell phones. You had to agree to actually meet in a specific place (not just "I'll text you and tell you which bar I'm in") and then you had to actually be there at the agreed time (not text "I'm running late, so I'll meet you at the restaurant instead"). People could still flake, but making specific plans and then not having a way of changing them short of completely failing to turn up probably meant less flaking. Carhill will be along soon to tell us that he remembers a time before landlines, too.
oaks Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 Carhill will be along soon to tell us that he remembers a time before landlines, too. LOL, when I started dating we had a rotary dial phone Oh. I was close.
April72 Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 Can't really offer much help. Any FWB I've tried to enter into someone got their feelings involved.... usually me.
musemaj11 Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 The whole FWB phenomenon is the reason why a lot of "average" guys today can't find GFs. Instead of a female 6 getting into a relationship with a comparable male 6, the female 6 joins the male 8's harem in the hopes that he will eventually commit. He won't. In the end, both the female 6 and the male 6 lose. For every alpha dude stringing three girls along in FWB arrangements, there are two beta dudes sleeping alone. This testifies that in the absence of social shaming, women would prefer to share an alpha than be exclusive with a beta. Men - be alpha. And this was why monogamy was probably created which was to ensure that there was someone for everyone.
Author Ruby Slippers Posted July 20, 2011 Author Posted July 20, 2011 (edited) Wow, a lot to respond to here! i'm not interested in tagging along in some woman's insanely hectic life, no matter how tempting her appearance and personality may be, nor am i interested in being activity #347 on the back burner in any given week for whenever she feels like it. This certainly does not apply to me. I have one friend who is extremely busy by choice, but another close friend and I are not like that at all. I am my own boss, so I can do what I want and my time is very flexible. If I like a guy, he can almost definitely get some time with me in the next week or even the next couple of days. d) NEVER tell a man no to any suggestion of his for a date due to anything less than work or family. (and yes i'm saying your female friends do not count) If I have already made plans with a friend, I'm not going to cancel them for a later invitation from a man. That's just rude. Now, once we start dating and getting into a groove of a certain amount of time spent together, there will always be plenty of room for him, and he will get to spend time with me on the weekend as much as he wants. Ruby, I think your just too loveable! No doubt you are hot and sexy, but the guys all fall for your loveable nature. Thanks! Interesting -- where are you looking for relationship material? Online? It was exclusively in the real world. I only recently began looking around OK Cupid a bit, and I have only messaged and been messaged by a few guys. I haven't posted any pictures or much info yet -- right now, I'm just looking at the matches they send me, getting a sense for the guys there. What is weird is that there's no rhyme or reason to who is communicative and who is not. I’m not impressed at all so far. It's always like, "Oooh, he seems really cool from his profile!" Then he messages me and turns out to be disappointing (after sex only, has a "complicated" situation, rude, etc.). But I did just begin. My theory is that it numbs you to real intimacy and human connection, but I'd say the same for men. I'm not worried about this. I think I approach FWB differently than most people, and I'm fine with that. I don't really do anything casually, and that includes FWB. My last FWB was someone too immature to be my boyfriend, but who had plenty of qualities that made him a great hangout and sex partner. It was never a wham bam thank you sir deal for me. It was basically like we were dating, just without going on dates or binding ourselves to any commitments beyond being honest with each other. We talked about everything in depth, cooked dinner together, watched movies, listened to music, cuddled, kissed and made out, and had great sex. What numbs you is to be lonely and never get any affection or sexifying. That's not healthy or natural, believe me! If I had met this awesome guy I wanted to get to know, like I said, I would have stopped seeing the FWB and let that fade out. He knew this was a possibility. He was also free to look for a girlfriend and leave at any time. I would have let him go and sincerely wished him the best. Even though we were just having sex and fun, we had intimacy and a human connection. Not playing the boyfriend and girlfriend roles freed us to talk about anything at all. We weren't trying to impress each other as marriage material, so we were totally blunt and honest about ourselves and our feelings and thoughts. We both got a lot of insight into ourselves just from our conversations, and also from the sex. We gave each other unfiltered feedback about everything, which is pretty priceless. I gave him dating and relationship advice that he really can use, and he appreciated that. He gave me feedback on all the things that attracted him to me from the start, some of which surprised me a bit, and I will use this information in future dating. Most of the men I've dated in the past five years had outgrown casual sex before I met them, and if it makes for a much better partner in a man (and I'd say it does), I cannot imagine it's any different with a woman. (Again, no offense, OP, just a different perspective.) It's only recently that I've begun experimenting to this degree with sex in a non-committed relationship. I know all about the chemical bonding reactions that sex produces, but I'm smart enough to think beyond them, or choose to give in to them if it's a good idea for me. I also understand what happens chemically when you're doing a high-pressure business negotiation -- and I use this knowledge to outwit the other person and win the contract terms I want. And both sides are all smiles. People love it when you know what you want and you make them feel comfortable, whether you're talking business or getting down to business in the sheets. Believe me, years ago, I told myself I was an artist, not a business person, and could never do some of the things I’m doing now, that it wasn’t natural for me. Well, I was wrong. I have dived in and learned a ton about how to use my mind to achieve specific results, and I use these new skills every single day. We are all just bags of chemicals, and you can be a slave to them, or be the master of them. I choose the latter. Also, it's worth nothing that for most of the time from late 2008 to mid-2011, I had NO casual sex beyond the FWB situation at the end of a 3-month dating relationship that wasn't going anywhere for me. This was basically my nun-like self-discovery phase -- useful, but sometimes sad and lonely. Now that I have begun exploring FWB relationships, MANY more men, and men who are getting closer to suitable for me, are approaching me. Being sexual and having fun with men is helping me get my mojo back, and apparently making me more attractive to men in general, which is great. It seems that most of the men I’m meeting have an FWB, too, and I don’t care. I want a guy who has a high sex drive and is not a porn addict. A guy who loves real sex and has FWBs from time to time is much more appealing to me than a guy with no sex drive or whose sexuality revolves around his porn collection. Also, I am beginning to think that peaceful, sincere monogamy is very rare, and why should we try to rope anyone into our idea of normal, when it is unnatural for them? This planet is crawling with way more people than ever before. We are all surrounded by a revolving buffet of delicious options -- especially in the big city, where I live. I have no problem with monogamy and in fact prefer it, but it seems that most people (men and women) struggle with it. But what's the fun in sleeping with someone you're not mad about? I just don't get it. (Not criticizing. . . just hard to wrap my head around.) I would never choose an FWB partner that I didn't really like and feel attracted to. The guy I chose last time, and the one I am discussing in this thread, only fall short of being relationship material for a couple of reasons, and they aren't reasons that are too out there. In fact, they are irrelevant when we are just hanging out. So, they're 90% boyfriend material, but that last 10% or so is deal breaker stuff. I like this guy a lot, and think I would love hanging out and having sex with him -- but I do think I can find a better match for long term, as can he. And I've told him why, and he says he understands. I can only speak for myself but I'm uninterested in it because I still see sex as something intimate and loving that happens with someone I really care about. Old-fashioned, maybe, but that's the only way sex is actually fun and interesting to me. (It's not a matter of morality or anything like that---I don't think people are bad people for sleeping around or doing FWBs or whatever; I just don't understand how it's any fun.) It's fun for me because there are no real stakes or pressure, and I get to just enjoy this sexy man as he is. I don't have to worry about his weak points at all. I can just enjoy his good points and relish in those. It feels very liberating and fun to me. I think it's also good for him. He gets the fun of hanging out and having sex with a cool girl, without ANY pressure or nagging of any kind, and maybe it's some form of motivation for him to bust through the barriers in his way of finding love. I check in with the guy often to make sure it's a positive experience for both of us. If it weren't, I wouldn't feel good about it and wouldn’t want to do it. I seriously doubt that any of these men are going to look back and regret the terrific fun and awesome sex we had! And neither will I. You don't get to your deathbed and think, "Man, I wish I'd had less fun and sex!" I had decided to meet up with this guy for coffee or lunch, but when we were planning it today, he told me he was seeing his FWB later that same day and felt guilty about meeting up with me. He said even though he’s not that into her and has not made a commitment to her, he would feel bad. So I’m guessing he considers her an FWB and she considers herself his girlfriend. I just told him the issues with him were piling up, and it was too much, so no thanks. There are more points to respond to, but I'll have to come back for those... Edited July 20, 2011 by Ruby Slippers
GoodOnPaper Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 We weren't trying to impress each other as marriage material, so we were totally blunt and honest about ourselves and our feelings and thoughts. We both got a lot of insight into ourselves just from our conversations, and also from the sex. We gave each other unfiltered feedback about everything, which is pretty priceless. I gave him dating and relationship advice that he really can use, and he appreciated that. He gave me feedback on all the things that attracted him to me from the start, some of which surprised me a bit, and I will use this information in future dating. I don't get it -- isn't this level of communication exactly what marriage is supposed to be about? But if it's only good for casual relationships, what exactly is "marriage material"? And why on earth would any guy want to be "marriage material"?
zengirl Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 I would never choose an FWB partner that I didn't really like and feel attracted to. The guy I chose last time, and the one I am discussing in this thread, only fall short of being relationship material for a couple of reasons, and they aren't reasons that are too out there. In fact, they are irrelevant when we are just hanging out. So, they're 90% boyfriend material, but that last 10% or so is deal breaker stuff. I like this guy a lot, and think I would love hanging out and having sex with him -- but I do think I can find a better match for long term, as can he. And I've told him why, and he says he understands. I guess this doesn't make sense to me. I either dig a guy or I don't---there aren't levels to it, really. (I mean, I can find a man attractive and not dig him, but I wouldn't be mad about him, as I said.) But maybe it's because the whole idea of "relationship material" is different for me. Relationship material to me is a great guy I could fall in love with who also could fall in love with me and is relationship-oriented. Now, granted, there are all sorts of traits that add up to make that "I could fall in love with" but I could never quantify it in %s. For me, it's 100% or 0% in terms of romance. I'm not saying I'm right there, and your viewpoint is wrong (at ALL!). I just don't understand it. In terms of the chemical thing you brought up, I never feel "a slave" to chemicals, personally. I'm not saying you are, but the fact that you say that having sex is helping you get back your mojo seems the opposite of saying "I choose not to be a slave to chemicals." It's the chemicals you're chasing with a FWB. And as such, you are now understanding nonmonogamy and so on. Which is fine. That's a whole movement that's going on now, and I'm open to other POVs, but it's why I don't date guys who do FWB still because they are still chasing chemical reactions over intimacy and emotional connections. I guess I just think if you want someone great to come in, you have to make room for them first. And if you're sleeping with someone else, there's no room for someone great to arrive. I could totally be wrong, but that's how it's always worked for me. Even though we were just having sex and fun, we had intimacy and a human connection. Not playing the boyfriend and girlfriend roles freed us to talk about anything at all. We weren't trying to impress each other as marriage material, so we were totally blunt and honest about ourselves and our feelings and thoughts. We both got a lot of insight into ourselves just from our conversations, and also from the sex. We gave each other unfiltered feedback about everything, which is pretty priceless. I gave him dating and relationship advice that he really can use, and he appreciated that. He gave me feedback on all the things that attracted him to me from the start, some of which surprised me a bit, and I will use this information in future dating. I think you're creating a false either/or dichotomy here that is a negative belief that's hurting you. I have never had issues speaking honestly in a good relationship, and I've always been able to talk about anything at all with my BFs (well with every BF I've had since college; I didn't realize how crucial communication was when I was young, of course).
EasyHeart Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 Even though we were just having sex and fun, we had intimacy and a human connection. Not playing the boyfriend and girlfriend roles freed us to talk about anything at all. We weren't trying to impress each other as marriage material, so we were totally blunt and honest about ourselves and our feelings and thoughts. We both got a lot of insight into ourselves just from our conversations, and also from the sex. We gave each other unfiltered feedback about everything, which is pretty priceless. I gave him dating and relationship advice that he really can use, and he appreciated that. He gave me feedback on all the things that attracted him to me from the start, some of which surprised me a bit, and I will use this information in future dating.I'm with Zengirl and GoodOnPaper on this one. What exactly is the problem with this guy? It seems to me the real problem here is that you haven't figured out what a good relationship or "marriage material" is yet. Being able to be comfortable, honest, relaxed and learn from each other is exactly what separates relationships from dating.
Lovelybird Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 (edited) Sounds like you put yourself in a position that is similar with OW, no commitment, no official date, no being wooed, and you have to constantly hear about the stories about he and his woman. and only available thing of his to you is his private part. and you have no right to require more of him. I think being lonely alone is much better than being in a relationship like this that could deteriorate self-love and self-esteem like no other could. It is not a mordern thing, but Edited July 20, 2011 by Lovelybird
thatone Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 In terms of the chemical thing you brought up, I never feel "a slave" to chemicals, personally. I'm not saying you are, but the fact that you say that having sex is helping you get back your mojo seems the opposite of saying "I choose not to be a slave to chemicals." It's the chemicals you're chasing with a FWB. And as such, you are now understanding nonmonogamy and so on. Which is fine. That's a whole movement that's going on now, and I'm open to other POVs, but it's why I don't date guys who do FWB still because they are still chasing chemical reactions over intimacy and emotional connections. I guess I just think if you want someone great to come in, you have to make room for them first. And if you're sleeping with someone else, there's no room for someone great to arrive. I could totally be wrong, but that's how it's always worked for me. I think you're creating a false either/or dichotomy here that is a negative belief that's hurting you. I have never had issues speaking honestly in a good relationship, and I've always been able to talk about anything at all with my BFs (well with every BF I've had since college; I didn't realize how crucial communication was when I was young, of course). i think the words you're looking for are... "these FWB arrangements let you be completely selfish and use another person for your own gain, without the hindrances of propriety, self respect, respect for others, or a list of other positive traits that any normal person has." i'm just blunt enough to come out and say it like it is . and it's true.
zengirl Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 i think the words you're looking for are... "these FWB arrangements let you be completely selfish and use another person for your own gain, without the hindrances of propriety, self respect, respect for others, or a list of other positive traits that any normal person has." i'm just blunt enough to come out and say it like it is . and it's true. If she's honest about what she wants, she's not "using" anyone for personal gain, so I'd never say that. Honestly, if the OP is hurting anyone (and I'm not saying she is; I really don't know), it's mostly herself, and that's only if this mindset she has with relationships and FWBs and such leads to her not finding a suitable partner, which she says she desires. I was just re-reading "Meeting Your Half-Orange" (listening on audio tape) this morning because I wanted to see if I thought it had a hand in me meeting my current BF (I do think so) and the author says something fabulous, "Casual sex leads to casual relationships." And she doesn't just mean with the person you have casual sex with----it leads to them in general. Almost every girl I know who's found awesome love gave up casual sex first, unless she was a total free spirit (which the OP doesn't really sound like if she's analyzing for marriage material---by free spirit, I mean, literally traveler, artist, in-the-moment, etc, and those girls don't categorize guys into FWB material/marriage material/etc. They just kind of do what moves them in the moment and see where it goes), and those girls have a different kind of casual sex that actually seems much less casual to me, since it has more a sense of romance and less a sense of rules. But those are just my thoughts. Everyone should do what's best for them, and I look forward to seeing what works out for the OP on her journey!
OliveOyl Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 Ruby, Are your standards too strict for what you consider boyfriend material? It's almost sounding like that to me.
Mme. Chaucer Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 I'm with Zengirl and GoodOnPaper on this one. What exactly is the problem with this guy? It seems to me the real problem here is that you haven't figured out what a good relationship or "marriage material" is yet. Being able to be comfortable, honest, relaxed and learn from each other is exactly what separates relationships from dating. I'm also kind of in the dark about this. What is "marriage material," or "relationship material"? What you are looking for with a FWB, to me, sounds just like a "relationship," except one that's not necessarily exclusive. It sounds like the phase of a relationship that leads up to the point where people decide whether to be exclusive, or not. I'm not "against" the FWB concept, except that I think that you have kind of overwrought it. It doesn't seem to me to be the type of arrangement that people are likely to be able to plan and organize. More likely, people will just fall together and discover as they go along that the only thing they really are interested in doing together is having sex. Those people, however, would not be "friends" or share any of the communication, etc., that you mention you want in your FWB scenario. The label is cumbersome and also false, in my opinion. Real "FWB" would be people who were actually friends with each other and who ended up expanding the friendship to include recreational sex. My daughter is 23 and I have seen this occur quite a bit among her large and amorphous social circle. It has nothing to do with meeting a very attractive guy in a club or something and making an arrangement based upon the fact that he is not "relationship material." When, in fact, you are interested in a relationship.
thatone Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 If she's honest about what she wants, she's not "using" anyone for personal gain, so I'd never say that. Honestly, if the OP is hurting anyone (and I'm not saying she is; I really don't know), it's mostly herself, and that's only if this mindset she has with relationships and FWBs and such leads to her not finding a suitable partner, which she says she desires. I was just re-reading "Meeting Your Half-Orange" (listening on audio tape) this morning because I wanted to see if I thought it had a hand in me meeting my current BF (I do think so) and the author says something fabulous, "Casual sex leads to casual relationships." And she doesn't just mean with the person you have casual sex with----it leads to them in general. Almost every girl I know who's found awesome love gave up casual sex first, unless she was a total free spirit (which the OP doesn't really sound like if she's analyzing for marriage material---by free spirit, I mean, literally traveler, artist, in-the-moment, etc, and those girls don't categorize guys into FWB material/marriage material/etc. They just kind of do what moves them in the moment and see where it goes), and those girls have a different kind of casual sex that actually seems much less casual to me, since it has more a sense of romance and less a sense of rules. But those are just my thoughts. Everyone should do what's best for them, and I look forward to seeing what works out for the OP on her journey! i agree completely, those situations where you meet someone while traveling and both people know that the relationship is time limited is completely different, and we're not really talking about that. it always seems to me like FWB arrangements are one person or the other reserving the right to toss the other aside whenever they please without guilt, by placing unreasonable expectations on each other. you can't really demand that people feel a certain way, it doesn't ever work.
David Cain Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 Ruby, Are your standards too strict for what you consider boyfriend material? It's almost sounding like that to me. Her "standards" aren't too "strict," it's just she hasn't met anyone that meets her qualifications.
Author Ruby Slippers Posted July 20, 2011 Author Posted July 20, 2011 The absolute best way to go about having a FWB arrangement is to be completely honest about what it is. When it's left open-ended--as in, maybe we'll just f*ck, maybe we'll end up in a relationship, who knows--more often than not it's massive drama. I agree completely, which is why I am always 100% honest in these situations. Even with safe sex, there is a real possibility of pregnancy or disease. I am very aware of these risks. Everything carries risks. I am extremely careful about both of those points. I am willing to accept the level of risk that is present. And, conversely the more skillful you get at not bonding during sex, the more likely you will continue to do that if you do meet a good guy. You could end up with a heart that is so armor plated no one can get in. I'm not worried about this. I used to think the same way, but after these experiences, I don't think that way anymore. I don't shut off my emotions with a casual lover -- I just choose to handle them appropriately. I've been reading and learning a lot about Buddhism lately, and I apply the philosophy here -- enjoy the moment, realize that everything good and bad passes, and accept what is without trying to control things you can't. Don't doubt for a second that this guy is completely intimidated by you...looks anyway...no matter how smart he may be. He knows the way things are these days, and contrary to what women will tell you, it's just as had or harder for men today. See if you hear back from him. I still haven't heard back from him. I really thought he would write back. And my message was very warm. I clearly communicated that I was interested, but didn't put any pressure on him. I'm not trying to objectify women or anything, but could you send me some pics so that I can fully appreciate the context of this thread, thanks. Given that I run a business, I talk about personal subjects here, and I do not want any professional-personal crossover, I think it's a bad idea to send face pictures that identify me. But I will send you a body picture or two, if you promise to keep them to yourself. I think that if you know or are fairly sure someone has deeper feelings for you and you are using them for fwb or sex, you are using them. That they agree to be used does not really make it much better. It is always about the person with the upper hand taking advantage. I see your point, but it is no one's responsibility to manage another person's emotions. Each person needs to decide for himself if the benefits of a situation outweigh the drawbacks. When I dated that guy for 3 months, then told him I didn't see it working long term, he basically said he wanted to be involved in my life to whatever extent I also wanted. It's not up to me to decide for him what he wants. Some people take high-risk jobs for high pay, and some people get into high-risk emotional situations for benefits they deem great -- that is their choice. You're not honest. You want a chance at a 10 rather than a sure 7. Not really. I want a guy who is on my level. That means some pretty basic things, like: - No serious issues getting in the way of having a stable relationship - Independent and financially self-sufficient (= not leaning on family for financial support, etc.) - In the same ballpark intellectually - Employed, or with enough savings, etc. to take care of himself I'm not saying you are, but the fact that you say that having sex is helping you get back your mojo seems the opposite of saying "I choose not to be a slave to chemicals." Not really. I choose to exercise because it boosts endorphins and improves mood (among other benefits). I am aware of the chemical benefits, and I am actively using them to my advantage. Am I a slave to chemicals because I exercise? No, I'm understanding and mastering them for my benefit. ...it's why I don't date guys who do FWB still because they are still chasing chemical reactions over intimacy and emotional connections. Any relationship you have is lousy with chemical reactions. When getting involved with a new lover, there's the strong mating urge and infatuation phase. After about 2 years, almost all men experience a sharp drop-off in sexual urge for the same woman. It's running full throttle for a certain period of time (6 months to a couple of years is typical), and then it just drops off a cliff. The men who are best-suited for monogamy will seek to rev up those chemicals through certain means, like doing fun, risky activities with that woman, etc. But most men will turn to other means, such as porn, other women, novel experiences outside the relationship, etc. And women have their own host of chemical reactions going on, too. Everyone is looking for some kind of fix pretty much all the time. I guess I just think if you want someone great to come in, you have to make room for them first. And if you're sleeping with someone else, there's no room for someone great to arrive. I could totally be wrong, but that's how it's always worked for me. Well, according to you, you've never had a casual lover, so you have no data from that situation, yes? For me, I was single and not having sex for most of the time from late 2008 to mid 2011 -- almost 3 years. During this time, I was going out a lot and having hardly any luck meeting men. Eventually, I got tired of the nun-like lifestyle, and decided to make one of these OK but not great guys my lover. Since then, I have many more men approaching me, and men more suitable for me. This modering dating is a lame-o excuse to go for the 10s exclusively. Average looking guys pickings are slim to none. Just about anyone would agree that the men I have shown interest in for FWB are 1-2 points lower than me on the scale. I prefer it that way. Her "standards" aren't too "strict," it's just she hasn't met anyone that meets her qualifications. Seriously. Several of my friends and I are going on dates with guys we used to think were way outside our preferences. I think I'm being very open minded. But certain things you just can't get past.
zengirl Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 Well, according to you, you've never had a casual lover, so you have no data from that situation, yes? For me, I was single and not having sex for most of the time from late 2008 to mid 2011 -- almost 3 years. During this time, I was going out a lot and having hardly any luck meeting men. Eventually, I got tired of the nun-like lifestyle, and decided to make one of these OK but not great guys my lover. Since then, I have many more men approaching me, and men more suitable for me. My data is based on what has worked out for female friends and what hasn't, not personal, as I said. I'm basing it also on women who appear to have met their terminal mate (which I'm not sure if I have or not yet; we shall see). All the women I know who've met their terminal mates were not into the FWB rules-not-intimacy sex. Some were free spirits who'd have sex on a first date, but it's a whole different psychology, as I said. At any rate, I'm not judging you and hope it works out for you. (And I said I could totally be wrong.) Definitely let us know if it does. Not really. I choose to exercise because it boosts endorphins and improves mood (among other benefits). I am aware of the chemical benefits, and I am actively using them to my advantage. Am I a slave to chemicals because I exercise? No, I'm understanding and mastering them for my benefit. I don’t understand what the “slave to chemicals” thing meant in your post then. FTR, I don’t disagree with doing things to create chemical reactions (I meditate, exercise, and even eat certain things for the same reasons), but I guess I misunderstand your point. I thought it was that somehow having a FWB makes you “not a slave to chemicals.” I don't think it does or that the reasons against having a FWB are, "I'm a slave to chemicals, so I can't" was what I was saying. Any relationship you have is lousy with chemical reactions. When getting involved with a new lover, there's the strong mating urge and infatuation phase. After about 2 years, almost all men experience a sharp drop-off in sexual urge for the same woman. It's running full throttle for a certain period of time (6 months to a couple of years is typical), and then it just drops off a cliff. The men who are best-suited for monogamy will seek to rev up those chemicals through certain means, like doing fun, risky activities with that woman, etc. But most men will turn to other means, such as porn, other women, novel experiences outside the relationship, etc. And women have their own host of chemical reactions going on, too. Everyone is looking for some kind of fix pretty much all the time. Disagree with you here on a chemical and psychological level. Men who are prone to bonding and intimacy will experience the chemical dropoff (as will women), but not to the same degree. It’s not always seeking “adventurous” activities that revs up the chemicals. Men who have learned to nurture (or are natural at it) are still affected by testosterone, but they’re also affected by oxytocin a lot more. You want the cuddlers essentially, if you’re seeking longterm. Because they dig the oxytocin buzz (either because their body has learned to because of their values or because they always did due to biology) as well as the testosterone buzz. However, I think most mature, relationship-oriented people are more above their own chemicals. Not that they don’t get chemical reactions but that they actively decide to create happiness for themselves rather than rely on it to chemically happen. Letting chemicals define a relationship is a poor idea.
VertexSquared Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 I'd be down for said pics. I do want to touch on this though: "- No serious issues getting in the way of having a stable relationship - Independent and financially self-sufficient (= not leaning on family for financial support, etc.) - In the same ballpark intellectually - Employed, or with enough savings, etc. to take care of himself" All of these are reasonable -- the hard one is #1. Almost everyone has issues somewhere. But they may not necessarily be the kind that interfere with a stable relationship. I suppose, though, what you consider to be unstable issues. Outside of that, it doesn't seem to add up to me. There are plenty of smart, financially-independent guys out there.
Author Ruby Slippers Posted July 20, 2011 Author Posted July 20, 2011 I'm basing it also on women who appear to have met their terminal mate Terminal mate? God, that sounds like a death sentence! A friend with benefits sure sounds a lot more appealing than a TERMINAL MATE. I thought it was that somehow having a FWB makes you “not a slave to chemicals.” I think you first brought up the argument that seeking a chemical reaction blocks you from intimacy and bonding. And I'm saying that there's an implicit judgment in that. You're saying that intimacy and bonding are superior to chemical reactions. I'm saying that it's really all the same thing. Believe me, I know plenty of boring "bonded" marriages with partners who feel trapped and a little dead inside. However, I think most mature, relationship-oriented people are more above their own chemicals. There's that air of superiority again. Get back to me in 10 years, once you're a little less certain you have everything figured out.
Recommended Posts