After or before sex

[bluenightowl]

Nope.

 

The catch is to manage expectations until exclusivity is established. I remember one girl who I know from the get go that was seeing other people. I said "**** it, you may be seeing her, but never fall in love with her". And, shockingly, it worked.

 

If you have so much faith in your liar detecting skills, good for you. Then again, there are people who lied about things much bigger than that, and for much longer than that (and I wouldn't be surprised if they took some to the grave).

 

Disturbing, I know, but that's the way it is.

 

I was rethinking this a bit. In the original scenario it is really about getting to the point of an exclusive relationship. I like the idea of patience and not getting too carried away with a woman, esp. at the beginning until you know her well.

 

However, would you really want to date someone 10, or 20+ times, possibly buying her dinner who you know is dating and having sex with someone else, and all the while you are hoping that this leads to a long term relationship? Then you go to a restaurant with your friends and she is there with one of the other guys she is dating. You had sex with her the night before, and your friends are wondering why he is with her if you are dating her. You tell them I said ****it, I'm just going to wait until she hopefully maybe picks me over these other guys. When that will be I have no idea, but I'm going to wait until she tells me. I painted it in an extreme way I know and its great things worked out for you.

 

Perhaps you also dating other women, and don't see her that much, but overall when I look at most of my friends relationships, very few go on more than 8 dates before they decide not to date anyone else and even less continue to date other people after sex unless they both are to just FWB.

[ThsAmericanLife]

I really would love to agree... except not everyone is honest.

 

In other words, you can ask other person about exclusivity before sex, he agrees, you two have sex (not before that, as assumed). Everything's fine, right?

 

Well, except other person didn't really intend to live up to promise they made and will still sleep around, even though said otherwise.

 

And bam, you got played either way.

 

A problem easily solved by getting to know the person before having sex.

 

If you are having sex in the first few dates, then it is easy to lie. Lots of men play this game in order to laid. This board is littered with the unfortunate outcomes.

[zengirl]

Honestly, the way I've usually figured out guys aren't seeing anyone else (and I imagine they figured out the same about me) was. . . once you've been talking and dating for a couple weeks, you usually know each other's schedules and what's going on/been happening in each other's lives.

 

I often invite guys I've been out with a few times to events where I'm with my friends and such and quite frequently meet theirs. . . you just know each other, you talk throughout the week, you plan things for the weekend. So, it's not like you have to be secretly worried they're going out with a bunch of other people.

 

The scenario you list, bluenightowl, seems unlikely.

[ThsAmericanLife]

Nope.

 

The catch is to manage expectations until exclusivity is established. I remember one girl who I know from the get go that was seeing other people. I said "**** it, you may be seeing her, but never fall in love with her". And, shockingly, it worked.

 

If you have so much faith in your liar detecting skills, good for you. Then again, there are people who lied about things much bigger than that, and for much longer than that (and I wouldn't be surprised if they took some to the grave).

 

Disturbing, I know, but that's the way it is.

 

It really isn't that hard to know when people are seeing others. PUA only score with the naive, less intelligent, and insecure.

[ThsAmericanLife]

I tend to concur with Sm1tten here.

 

For me, I would need to know fairly soon (not the first date, but within the first month) whether I'm physically and sexually compatible with the person I'm dating.... in order to figure out whether it even makes sense to BE exclusive. Now I wouldn't sleep with someone who I know is sleeping with someone else. But for me, the sexual component is an integral part of the relationship. It's part of the emotional connectivity, not separate. And I wouldn't assume that because I click with the guy I'm dating in other ways that we will automatically click in bed too.

 

Keep in mind, I'm older than a lot of the posters here, so that may make a difference. At my age, it seems rather silly to wait a long time: we have kids, we're obviously far from virgins; it's not really the "big deal" in the same way it is when one is younger.

 

I'm older than alot of the posters here... and I happen to agree with zengirl.

 

I've done my experimenting and trips 'around the block'. It is more the norm that I'll really hit it off with a guy sexually, then get bored quick because there was no real intimacy there and the guy wasn't terribly smart or interesting.... or there were some other lifestyle issues that didn't click. I'm always the one doing the dumping in that case. Not very responsible.

 

Once I realized that it is the intimacy that is the 'hard' part... and sexual compatibility ridiculously easy to figure out (if one even cares to take the time), then I changed my approach. Pretty much did a 180.

 

and ya know what?? I don't have nearly the drama, angst, and other junk burdening me... either by causing hurt/confusion or getting it. And I've developed alot higher quality relationships too.

 

So, definately not going back to the sex first, ask questions later approach. BTDT.

[bluenightowl]

Honestly, the way I've usually figured out guys aren't seeing anyone else (and I imagine they figured out the same about me) was. . . once you've been talking and dating for a couple weeks, you usually know each other's schedules and what's going on/been happening in each other's lives.

 

I often invite guys I've been out with a few times to events where I'm with my friends and such and quite frequently meet theirs. . . you just know each other, you talk throughout the week, you plan things for the weekend. So, it's not like you have to be secretly worried they're going out with a bunch of other people.

 

The scenario you list, bluenightowl, seems unlikely.

 

The question really is, is not communicating a better strategy. I understand that playing it cool style Rafallus mentioned. Its attractive in general.

 

Most people think one should talk about exclusivity before sex, I was suggesting just after sex, and now Rafallus was suggesting not at all, and wait it out and see how it goes.

 

I just know so many people (men and woman) who said nothing, tried to play it cool, and later got hurt by not communicating their needs.

[OliveOyl]

For me, it is an essential component as well and I 100% agree that I believe sex is part of emotional connectivity; in fact, I connect heavily to my BF through sex and intimacy and express myself through affection, including sex, quite a bit. I think the notion that waiting means sex is less important to you is strange.

 

I wait because sex is so important to me and because I believe it's a integral part of a relationship.

 

So you wait many dates or a month or two, and you and your guy agree to be exclusive even though there's a chance that the sex might be lacking... I suppose if it were, you could dump him then...

 

For the same reason I'd never marry someone without having sex first, I'd never commit to someone (agree to be BF/GF) without having sex first... it just makes more sense (to me) to have as much information about the person before agreeing on such things.

[zengirl]

So you wait many dates or a month or two, and you and your guy agree to be exclusive even though there's a chance that the sex might be lacking... I suppose if it were, you could dump him then...

 

For the same reason I'd never marry someone without having sex first, I'd never commit to someone (agree to be BF/GF) without having sex first... it just makes more sense (to me) to have as much information about the person before agreeing on such things.

 

I think of it as a natural progression. Yes, if the sex were bad, I could pull out of the relationship. Honestly, though, if you connect on other physical levels, I think sex is likely to be good. The emotional, the intellectual, and the physical are a progression for me. It's not like I go from little/no physicality to sex. The way a guy kisses or cuddles or makes out tells me a lot about his sexual energy.

 

I wouldn't marry someone without having sex, as that's a permanent commitment (hopefully) but I would, of course, be committed without having sex because to ME there is a degree of commitment and exclusivity implied in such an intimate act. I'm not saying that's right, but it has nothing to do with caring little about sex or not finding it fundamentally important to a relationship. I'm hugely sexual! I just choose to assess basic compatibility first and commit to an attempt at building a relationship with someone first. A commitment to a relationship for me is an attempt very much. It's not saying that guy will be around forever or next year or for any particular length of time; it is saying that I think there is that possibility and that right now, in this moment, he is important to me and worthy of my 100% attention.

 

I don't really understand the notion that it's difficult to give someone who is potentially a life partner 100% of my attention to assess whether or not it will work. If we were to be totally sexually incompatible (never happened to me ---- well, except with my college BF and I didn't really care at the time or think of him as a real potential anyway, for a variety of reasons, but that's a long story --- because through discussions of sexual things and other physicality you can determine TONS of things about your future sex life), of course, that wouldn't work out or grow beyond that point and would eventually end. But building the other levels of compatibility first enhance the sex, help me be comfortable and uninhibited, and grow intimacy.

 

I'm not saying my way is the RIGHT way. I'm just saying it has nothing to do with not valuing sex --- that's a common myth, though. The thing is, I'm not impatient and I have faith. Granted, I don't often wait two months. My current BF and I were in a relationship (meaning we were exclusive, we knew this was going somewhere, and we were using those terms) within a month of our first date and had sex shortly after that.

[bluenightowl]

You should always know where the relationship is going before sharing your body with anyone! That way, if you are not on the same page, you won't have done something that you regretted later.

 

That's good advice, but I do wonder if there is gender difference here?

If men pursue in general, I think it can be harder for men to hold off if a woman invites the opportunity for a sexual encounter.

 

I do think there is a stereotype of women having to be extra careful with men who only want sex, and men who get complimented whenever they get sex.

 

There is another whole thread about men who refrain from the opportunity to have sex. I know myself it can be a challenge to pace things.

 

That said, if by chance you did have sex and didn't discuss it beforehand, would it not be a good idea to talk about it soon afterwards?

[Cypress25]

Without having anything going on, you essentially put other person on the spot. And if other person feels pressured, whole thing isn't happening. And I mean neither sex, not relationship - because who would like to get with someone so pressuring, when there are fun people in the world?

 

Just because you're not having sex yet doesn't mean you don't have anything going on. There is a lot of physical intimacy that leads up to sex. And there is a difference between talking about exclusivity and pressuring someone for exclusivity. You can talk about it calmly without pressuring anyone.

 

Hell, after one sex, it still may not be enough. I'd take a few months of having at least a decent idea, what kind of person she really is.

 

I also need at least a few months to get a decent idea of what kind of person he is. That's why I wait more than a few months before having sex.

 

I really would love to agree... except not everyone is honest.

 

In other words, you can ask other person about exclusivity before sex, he agrees, you two have sex (not before that, as assumed). Everything's fine, right?

 

Well, except other person didn't really intend to live up to promise they made and will still sleep around, even though said otherwise.

 

And bam, you got played either way.

 

Well, I don't have sex with a guy right after we agree to be exclusive. We'd have to be exclusive for at least a month or two before I would have sex with him. That way I know he's for real, and not just saying what I want to hear.

 

I wait because sex is so important to me and because I believe it's a integral part of a relationship.

 

Exactly! That's what I've been trying to say.

 

So you wait many dates or a month or two, and you and your guy agree to be exclusive even though there's a chance that the sex might be lacking... I suppose if it were, you could dump him then...

 

If the sex is lacking, then you either work on it or you break up. It's easy enough to end a dating relationship. It's not like filing for divorce.

 

For the same reason I'd never marry someone without having sex first, I'd never commit to someone (agree to be BF/GF) without having sex first... it just makes more sense (to me) to have as much information about the person before agreeing on such things.

 

I wouldn't marry someone without having sex first, because marriage is permanent (hopefully). It's a major commitment. Agreeing to be boyfriend/girlfriend, on the other hand, is not a lifelong commitment. If it doesn't work out, you just break up. I don't need to know everything about a guy before I get into a relationship with him. That's what the relationship is for!

 

Besides, zengirl made an excellent point. You don't need to have sex to experience physical intimacy with your partner. Kissing, foreplay, etc...all that stuff can tell you a lot about each other. It gives you a good idea of the chemistry between you. You don't go from nothing to sex; you build up to sex gradually.

[OliveOyl]

Just because you're not having sex yet doesn't mean you don't have anything going on. There is a lot of physical intimacy that leads up to sex. And there is a difference between talking about exclusivity and pressuring someone for exclusivity. You can talk about it calmly without pressuring anyone.

 

 

 

I also need at least a few months to get a decent idea of what kind of person he is. That's why I wait more than a few months before having sex.

 

 

 

Well, I don't have sex with a guy right after we agree to be exclusive. We'd have to be exclusive for at least a month or two before I would have sex with him. That way I know he's for real, and not just saying what I want to hear.

 

 

 

Exactly! That's what I've been trying to say.

 

 

 

If the sex is lacking, then you either work on it or you break up. It's easy enough to end a dating relationship. It's not like filing for divorce.

 

 

 

I wouldn't marry someone without having sex first, because marriage is permanent (hopefully). It's a major commitment. Agreeing to be boyfriend/girlfriend, on the other hand, is not a lifelong commitment. If it doesn't work out, you just break up. I don't need to know everything about a guy before I get into a relationship with him. That's what the relationship is for!

 

Besides, zengirl made an excellent point. You don't need to have sex to experience physical intimacy with your partner. Kissing, foreplay, etc...all that stuff can tell you a lot about each other. It gives you a good idea of the chemistry between you. You don't go from nothing to sex; you build up to sex gradually.

Okay, in addition to everything else, I think this must be an age/experience thing. I don't think people who have been previously married will typically be waiting months to have sex the first time with a partner (some may, but I think it is rare). In addition, after a certain age it seems strange to spend whole dates engaging in nothing but foreplay; yes sex is special but it's not that special... it's a natural progression, IMHO. Now if you are concerned about STDs or pregnancy I can understand waiting, but well... we're just on a completely different page about it, I can see.

[Star Gazer]

Before, before, before, before, BEFORE!

[Cypress25]

Okay, in addition to everything else, I think this must be an age/experience thing. I don't think people who have been previously married will typically be waiting months to have sex the first time with a partner (some may, but I think it is rare).

 

That's probably true. I'm only 25 and I've never been married. Of course, I hope to only get married once in my life, but life doesn't always happen according to plan.

 

In addition, after a certain age it seems strange to spend whole dates engaging in nothing but foreplay

 

I love foreplay! If there's great chemistry, I could do it all night. And I usually finish the guy by hand so he doesn't have to experience any discomfort.

 

yes sex is special but it's not that special... it's a natural progression, IMHO. Now if you are concerned about STDs or pregnancy I can understand waiting, but well... we're just on a completely different page about it, I can see.

 

Well, I'm on the pill and I use a condom every time, but I'm also very patient. Of course I want to have sex if I'm physically and emotionally attracted to the guy, but waiting a few months doesn't feel like torture to me. We're still having fun together, and I like a little anticipation.

[zengirl]

The question really is, is not communicating a better strategy. I understand that playing it cool style Rafallus mentioned. Its attractive in general.

 

Didn't see this before. Is not communicating, as a strategy, better? IMO, for what I'm looking for (a real relationship): Absolutely not!

 

I don't get that strategy and mostly see it backfire. As defense mechanisms often do. For other desires, maybe it works. I'm not familiar enough with how one goes about having casual sex successfully to say. (And that's an entirely male question. If I wanted to have casual sex, I wouldn't have to employ any particular strategy, really.)

 

That's good advice, but I do wonder if there is gender difference here?

If men pursue in general, I think it can be harder for men to hold off if a woman invites the opportunity for a sexual encounter.

 

This is potentially true. However, I think good communication is still the key. Besides, depends what you mean. If some random girl tries to jump your bones on the first date without you making a move. . . I'm a little skeptical. Same thing with a man first. Anyone who rushes straight to sex, beyond all the other stages of physical intimacy, is acting strangely IMO. So, the secret to cutting off sex early, if the other person seems to be heading there, is simply to start to pull back slightly during the other stages of sexual intimacy. Hard to explain, but it's like dancing. Both people will wind up going at the same pace.

 

Okay, in addition to everything else, I think this must be an age/experience thing. I don't think people who have been previously married will typically be waiting months to have sex the first time with a partner (some may, but I think it is rare).

 

I know some that did, but maybe they were the exceptions. One of my divorced friends is the slowest of all (she is in her early 30s) my friends about sex. My mother didn't have sex with my stepfather for six months! They got married within a year of meeting, and that timeline still surprises me. Six months! And they were engaged within eight months! Geez.

 

In general, I would say the divorcees I know are EXTRA careful about sex, compared to my younger friends. But the divorcees I know are all in their early to mid 30s/late 20s, and only one has kids. The one with kids? She moves quickly, like the young girls do. A lot of my young friends (younger than me, so early 20s) seem to move the fastest. They'll screw a guy on the 2nd date and think they're in a relationship. Despite the fact that it didn't work out well the last time they tried that, they keep at it. I don't get it.

[oaks]

Before, before, before, before, BEFORE!

 

Cute.

 

Were you thumping your hand on the table as you said that?

[bluenightowl]

Didn't see this before. Is not communicating, as a strategy, better? IMO, for what I'm looking for (a real relationship): Absolutely not!

 

I don't get that strategy and mostly see it backfire. As defense mechanisms often do. For other desires, maybe it works. I'm not familiar enough with how one goes about having casual sex successfully to say. (And that's an entirely male question. If I wanted to have casual sex, I wouldn't have to employ any particular strategy, really.)

 

Yes, my point was the same as yours. Raffalus was suggesting not communicating and seeing how it goes and that might likely include sex. Again, I wonder from a gender perspective if he has a point. A man looking calm and certain, not anxious to ask to be exclusive can be attractive to a woman. He's already pursuing her, so she knows he likes her.

 

However, I was suggesting communicating is still better than staying silent. That is communicating about wanting an exclusive relationship than just going with casual sex until she picks you over the other guys. As you say below communication is still the key.

[ThsAmericanLife]

That's good advice, but I do wonder if there is gender difference here?

If men pursue in general, I think it can be harder for men to hold off if a woman invites the opportunity for a sexual encounter.

 

I do think there is a stereotype of women having to be extra careful with men who only want sex, and men who get complimented whenever they get sex.

 

There is another whole thread about men who refrain from the opportunity to have sex. I know myself it can be a challenge to pace things.

 

That said, if by chance you did have sex and didn't discuss it beforehand, would it not be a good idea to talk about it soon afterwards?

 

Wise men who want a relationship, will nonetheless hold off.

 

I believe it shows emotional maturity in a man to exhibit this quality... and take the time to make sure that both are on the same page prior to sex.

 

Expecting the woman to be the one to always set the pace seems like something immature men expect. When I see this quality in a man (expecting me to set the pace), I take it as a red flag.

 

It means that they will (down the road) probably take sex from any willing female they are attracted to...or have no willpower/discipline. Not someone I'd want to invest in.

[ThsAmericanLife]

Yes, my point was the same as yours. Raffalus was suggesting not communicating and seeing how it goes and that might likely include sex. Again, I wonder from a gender perspective if he has a point. A man looking calm and certain, not anxious to ask to be exclusive can be attractive to a woman. He's already pursuing her, so she knows he likes her.

 

However, I was suggesting communicating is still better than staying silent. That is communicating about wanting an exclusive relationship than just going with casual sex until she picks you over the other guys. As you say below communication is still the key.

 

I don't take lack of desire to communicate to be calm or certain. Just the opposite.

 

I take it as opportunistic and selfish. If the man I was seeing took my desire to communicate expectations up front as 'needy', then we wouldn't have similar values... or I'd know that he wasn't interested in a relationship with me and so refusing sex with him probably is a wise choice.

 

I'm doing this with the guy I recently FZ'd. He attempted to set up a 4th date with me that included a visit to his house... I'm assuming with the intention of having sex. Right around the same time, I learned he was seeing multiple women. I'm also assuming he didn't intend to tell me about this prior to having sex (ie using Raphallus approach).

 

Well, instead of agreeing to go to his house, I used it as an opportunity to clarify expectations. Turned out, he wasn't ready to be exclusive. So, I declined the invitation. He 'countered' with an offer to be FWB and have sort of an 'open' relationship. I said no.

 

We are still friends, and we keep in touch... When pressed, he finally did tell the truth... so I didn't see the need to cut him loose entirely.

 

One could argue that he fibbed a bit or was lying by omission (my take) or one could argue that he simply has a different approach to dating. Either way, I don't have to worry about it. I cleared it up, and see our goals don't match.

 

Very happy to have done this before jumping into bed with him. I only hope the other ladies he may or may not be sleeping with know or have the cahones to ask if he is also having sex with others. STD's suck.

[bluenightowl]

I don't take lack of desire to communicate to be calm or certain. Just the opposite.

 

I take it as opportunistic and selfish. If the man I was seeing took my desire to communicate expectations up front as 'needy', then we wouldn't have similar values... or I'd know that he wasn't interested in a relationship with me and so refusing sex with him probably is a wise choice.

 

Sure, but Raffalus wasn't suggesting that. He was waiting for the woman to communicate with him, or for her to go exclusive with him because SHE was dating multiple people not him. I don't think he was against talking about it, but just wasn't going to bring it up and see how things went. Again maybe there is a gender issue here since so many men can detach from sex and he was willing to take the risk he would get dumped and that she was having sex with another man. I personally would bring it up because I've learned I'm not into sharing.

[rafallus]

Sure, but Raffalus wasn't suggesting that. He was waiting for the woman to communicate with him, or for her to go exclusive with him because SHE was dating multiple people not him. I don't think he was against talking about it, but just wasn't going to bring it up and see how things went. Again maybe there is a gender issue here since so many men can detach from sex and he was willing to take the risk he would get dumped and that she was having sex with another man. I personally would bring it up because I've learned I'm not into sharing.

 

Sort of like that.

 

In other words, I don't have preset mindset "I want to get into relationship" OR "I want some ONSs now". It's more like I meet the person, get to know them, and if I really like her as people, I want an exclusive relationship. If she isn't quite all that, yet still attractive enough, I'm fine with going more casual.

[bluenightowl]

Sort of like that.

 

In other words, I don't have preset mindset "I want to get into relationship" OR "I want some ONSs now". It's more like I meet the person, get to know them, and if I really like her as people, I want an exclusive relationship. If she isn't quite all that, yet still attractive enough, I'm fine with going more casual.

 

It can work as long as you don't get attached or fall in love and reading the forums this is why so many woman avoid sex because they often get too attached after sex. Men not so much.

 

Even myself, I can only do that if I don't really like the person enough to fall for them, but now I just don't bother with people I'm not super interested in, so I'd never put up with dating and having sex with a woman who was also sleeping with another guy. I would just move on.

Edited September 1, 2011 by bluenightowl

[ThsAmericanLife]

It can work as long as you don't get attached or fall in love and reading the forums this is why so many woman avoid sex because they often get too attached after sex. Men not so much.

.

 

I've thought about this alot over the years... some people want to claim it is something biological... but my experience shows it really isn't.

 

Women (even if the sex meant little or nothing) are more compelled to MAKE it into something because there is social pressure to avoid being considered a slut.

 

The double standard is still very much alive and well. Men have no such pressure, so they are perfectly free to make of it whatever they want.

 

IME, it is the men I've met that become attached to ME after sex. If the sex is great, a man can/will fall in love pretty quick. I really hurt some men that way... back when I 'assumed' that all men wanted was sex...

 

I'm perfectly capable of having sex with no attachment... and had alot in my younger years.

 

These days... I've made the very conscious choice that I want a relationship and want to spend my time focusing on men who also want a relationship...

 

and I've observed that the most effective way to do that is to have communication up front, before sex. It isn't about morals or which gender does or doesn't get attached... It is more about what I've observed to 'work'... both in the short and long term.

[grkBoy]

I usually like to gauge what she's looking for in life before we go all the way. Is she more looking for just fun, or a boyfriend? She doesn't have to say it, or even say she wants me to be the BF, but I can see in conversation, actions, etc. what she's looking for out of life.

 

Again though, it's been easier for me because I've always looked for long-term. It's probably harder for the men and women who only want a fling or short-term thing because they're wanting all the benefits of a RL without the deep commitment.

[bluenightowl]

I've thought about this alot over the years... some people want to claim it is something biological... but my experience shows it really isn't.

 

Women (even if the sex meant little or nothing) are more compelled to MAKE it into something because there is social pressure to avoid being considered a slut.

 

The double standard is still very much alive and well. Men have no such pressure, so they are perfectly free to make of it whatever they want.

 

IME, it is the men I've met that become attached to ME after sex. If the sex is great, a man can/will fall in love pretty quick. I really hurt some men that way... back when I 'assumed' that all men wanted was sex...

 

I'm perfectly capable of having sex with no attachment... and had alot in my younger years.

 

These days... I've made the very conscious choice that I want a relationship and want to spend my time focusing on men who also want a relationship...

 

and I've observed that the most effective way to do that is to have communication up front, before sex. It isn't about morals or which gender does or doesn't get attached... It is more about what I've observed to 'work'... both in the short and long term.

 

Very interesting. It would be interesting to know if casual dating and sex is more likely to lead to a strong LTR versus your approach. I suspect the latter.

 

I think you have a point about men having good sex. I've been a victim of that myself. I think your strategy is a good one. I still believe men have a harder time with it.

 

If a woman you want a relationship with, is attractive, and is making sexual advances, it is very difficult to get out of the situation, or bring up where things are going before sex.

 

However as mentioned I've been stung myself having brought up the issue after sex to only find out, for them they still wanted to date around.

[Mme. Chaucer]

I think that "BEFORE" is the right answer ...

 

But, I have never done that myself.

 

All of my relationships have had a very organic flow that included sex happening at just the "right" moment to cement and increase a bond that was already getting pretty deep.

 

I did wait quite a long time to have sex, though. I believe that if the fellow had not been on the same page as I was, that way, he would not have still been there when having sex was the right option for me.

 

Honestly, I don't remember having those kinds of talks at all (about becoming exclusive). I suppose I dated and got seriously intimate with men who were like-minded with me regarding the role of sex in a relationship.

 

Admittedly, I could have been wrong, but evidently I was not.

 

Still, if there are any questions about the intentions of the two people involved, unless casual sex is an option, I'd say the talk happens before sex happens.