casual sex with people you don't really like

[ThsAmericanLife]

Actually, I used to have a friend, who called woman a slut, explicitly because he slept with her on a first date. Yet, in his mind he was not one, and complained, how he can't find a decent woman, because all he attracts are complete sluts.

 

Well, in a truly shocking turn of events, he turned out not to be much of friend anyway.

 

Yes, it is sad to see that.

 

There was an article I read on Askmen. com not long ago. It said "Think she's a slut? Don't make her one by sleeping with her on the first date."

 

It was kind of refreshing...

[bluenightowl]

Actually, I used to have a friend, who called woman a slut, explicitly because he slept with her on a first date. Yet, in his mind he was not one, and complained, how he can't find a decent woman, because all he attracts are complete sluts.

 

Well, in a truly shocking turn of events, he turned out not to be much of friend anyway.

 

This talk is reminding me of the Mr. Dream Merchant thread. Didn't he more or less say the same thing.

[Cypress25]

if I just gave up and sent every girl home that told me she didn't want to move too fast as I am unhooking her bra then I'd be a virgin still at 28 years old.

 

Can't you get a girl to have sex with you without lying to her?

 

By "making sure" she is on the same page as me will cause her to be "off the page" real fast.

 

Don't you feel weird knowing that every girl who sleeps with you regrets it later? How embarrassing for you.

 

for all I know she's looking for the same thing with me, maybe she just wants sex too after realizing it probably won't go further than that.

 

If you really thought she was looking for the same thing, you wouldn't be afraid to be honest with her. You're deceiving her because you know she wants more than casual sex.

 

So am I to risk making a situation awkward and sabotaging my chance at a casual sex relationship by being brutally honest?

 

Of course not. Selfish people can't be expected to do such things. How could anyone expect you to be honest, or considerate, or respectful, or to have integrity? That's not in your nature.

 

So there, I don't even need to take her on a date.

 

This may be an ignorant question, but how come you don't like her enough to date her? What's wrong with her?

 

Why don't you find a girl who just wants a f*ck buddy, instead of deliberately hurting people? The girls that you're hurting are not the same girls who hurt you in the past. It's not fair to them to be treated this way. Of course you don't care because you don't care about anyone but yourself, but this might come back to bite you in the ass.

[bluenightowl]

I am so horny at this point that I am no longer happy single. I frankly am desperate, and it shows.

 

If things were different, if I was younger, if I had girls actually interested in me...well, maybe then things would be better.

 

They aren't.

 

At last count there was around 3 billion women out there. With all this LS learning, I'm sure you can find one good one.

[AHardDaysNight]

At last count there was around 3 billion women out there. With all this LS learning, I'm sure you can find one good one.

 

You'd think so.

 

Honestly, maybe I'm too damaged to be in a relationship.

[bluenightowl]

Folks will see a consistent trend with me, and that I believe that both people have to take responsibility for their behavior.

 

I agree with that, but just as in law, intent matters as well. If a guy is manipulating a woman to have sex, and she does want sex and then regrets it, she has to take some responsibility for having sex, but she had good intentions.

 

That is to say people make decisions based on the information they have and don't have.

[Mme. Chaucer]

Do any of you find when you date someone you are attracted to but see little or no LTR potential you just go for sex faster? You might like them enough, like to date them, but they are really no one who you would want to marry, but hey you haven't had sex for a while and it could be fun. You might not even care if its just casual sex or not and not care if they are dating anyone else or not because you are still looking for the BBD yourself. It might lead to a LTR, but you really don't care and if tomorrow you meet someone better, then fine. If they dump you, no big deal. It sucks for a few hours.

 

Not me, never, unless I was completely wrecked on drugs & alcohol. Which was terrible for me, so I stopped doing those things.

 

Yuck, for me. I ONLY want to have sex with people I feel super attracted to, and for me, feeling super attracted includes wanting to be in a relationship with the person. The attraction is not merely physical; it's happening on many levels at once. Sometimes, not a wise judgement call ... but that's the way it has been for me, all my life.

 

Then when you date someone who has incredible LTR potential in your eyes, you immediately want to not date anyone else, go exclusive, and not rush things ESP. the sex. You light up and they can almost do no wrong in your eyes.

 

Well. Personally, I have never been one to rush into sex. That just doesn't work for me. I'm not comfortable with it. So, if a guy didn't want to wait - it all became a non issue. No sex was had; no relationship either.

 

Also, I did not spend (more like "waste") my time "dating" people who didn't have LTR potential in my eyes. I had other things I'd much rather do than date those guys. Like read books.

 

I hear woman and some men describe this scenario allot on these boards and elsewhere. I think recently someone said they have sex with the bad boys but marry the good boys, or to put it another way, if you really don't care about them, then you'll have sex on date x, but wait with the guy you like and get to know him. I think this could apply to both genders.

 

I'm pretty sure it was a GUY who said that about women having sex with the bad boys, marrying the good boys, bla bla bla. Certainly there are girls / women who think and behave that way, but I don't think it's exactly a "norm." Most of us want to have sex with and marry the same guy.

[Mme. Chaucer]

Just for the record, I find it incredibly offensive when people assign labels upon other people like "quality" or "low quality."

 

The person is not a large ticket retail item, folks.

 

If you don't like them, if you find their morals questionable or distasteful, if you think they have B.O., fine. Stay away from them. But really, I doubt you are in a position to determine their "quality" as human beings.

[ThsAmericanLife]

Also, I did not spend (more like "waste") my time "dating" people who didn't have LTR potential in my eyes. I had other things I'd much rather do than date those guys. Like read books..

 

I love reading too! Some other possible activities...

 

...scrape paint

...camp solo on a mountain with your best dog buddy

...perfect my arabesques

...learn how to play guitar

 

etc.

[Mme. Chaucer]

I love reading too! Some other possible activities...

 

...scrape paint

...camp solo on a mountain with your best dog buddy

...perfect my arabesques

...learn how to play guitar

 

etc.

 

We are soul sisters!

 

Are you a dancer? I used to be, in my halcyon days. Which are long gone by now.

 

I acknowledge that women exist who would do it, but the oft cited (here, by guys who want to "prove" how base women are) concept of spending even ONE evening with a guy who was not interesting to me so I could get a free meal in a restaurant is more mind boggling to me than psychedelic drugs.

 

I mean, maybe if I were near to starvation, or could sneak a doggie bag back home to a passel of ravenous children, back in the Big Depression ...

 

Nope. Not even then.

[dasein]

Well, if people have sex early (the man or the woman), they certainly relinquish any 'rights' regarding judgement of another person's sexuality after the fact.

 

In other words, a man can't call the girl a 'slut' if he makes a habit of having sex early as well.

 

A man who has sex on a first date might be one of the top % of guys for whom sex is available on a first date regulary, or much more likely, he is not. He may have had 10 first dates over the last six months and been reasonably charming and forward, yet no sex resulted. He paid for all those dates. When he asked the women out for a second date, five blew him off without any reply. Two of the remaining five went out with him again for the second date, still no sex, and went right home to blow their FWB. They ditched our guy after the second or third date. The last three, HE decided that he didn't like two of them, which is his right, and the last girl may or may not pan out into anything. That's the way dating works for 90-95% of men, MUCH risk, relatively little chance of reward, sexual or otherwise. He may be flirty and sexually forward with all those women, but has NO CONTROL over whether his efforts will result in sex. If he doesn't try with them all, though, he won't get ANY sex, that's for sure, and if we are being 100% honest, his not trying for sex will actually turn most of them off.

 

Women regularly post here that a lack of experience in men is a turnoff for many women. If a guy acts like a niceguy virgin on the first date, not only will he have 0 chance of getting sex, but he will also send up red flags in the women. This is actually a TRUE double standard in that women expect not to be judged for their level of sexual experience, yet freely judge men for their level of sexual experience.

 

Now, let's contrast that with a female dater. She is taken out and treated to 10 dates. She can have first date sex on each and every one of those dates if she chooses and the guy is willing (odds are all of them will be). If she decides to go out with five of the men on a second date, once more, she can choose to have sex on ALL FIVE of those dates or not, she has complete control. Now say she then goes out on third dates with 3 of the five, once more, she can have sex or not at her TOTAL DISCRETION, with those remaining guys. She can wait until she has narrowed down the field to someone she likes who likes her, or she can start having sex on the first date. Why would someone who has that level of control EVER choose to have sex on a first date unless she has impulsivity, baggage, or emotional problems or issues? Why not wait to decide, over several dates, if she likes them? After all, she can call ANY of them at ANY time and likely get her desire for sex met.

 

Therefore, because of the immense differences between men and women in this regard, and the different levels of control they have, it is completely reasonable for a man to judge a woman for first date sex when he was a willing participant also. And even if it were a little unreasonable on his part, women apply MANY such double standards to men, I will happily list some of them if you like.

 

So what's really tiring is seeing the bogus double standard argument used here by women to justify female promiscuity, who say that by having sex a man loses all right to judge a woman for having sex. BS. Very few men have the level of control of sex and whether or not to even be promiscuous that almost ALL women have. End of story, finito.

Edited September 10, 2011 by dasein

[Cypress25]

That's the way dating works for 90-95% of men, MUCH risk, relatively little chance of reward, sexual or otherwise. He may be flirty and sexually forward with all those women, but has NO CONTROL over whether his efforts will result in sex.

 

So the only possible reward is sex? If he doesn't get that, he gets nothing? Companionship, interesting conversation, a fun night out, kissing...none of that counts for anything? If that's how you feel about women, why not hire a prostitute? Surely that would be cheaper than treating several women to dinner, and you're guaranteed sex in exchange for the money you spend. Whereas in dating, you run the risk of spending money without getting sex, and apparently that is TOO MUCH risk for you.

 

Women regularly post here that a lack of experience in men is a turnoff for many women. If a guy acts like a nice guy virgin on the first date, not only will he have 0 chance of getting sex, but he will also send up red flags in the women.

 

Only virgins can be nice guys? How does one act like a virgin during a date anyway? I always thought virgins were just regular people, but apparently they act different? Virginity (or lack thereof) has nothing to do with your personality. Just because a guy is a virgin doesn't necessarily mean he's nice, and vice versa. I've only ever dated non-virgins, and they were all nice, caring, respectful guys. And I happen to find that attractive.

 

After all, she can call ANY of them at ANY time and likely get her desire for sex met.

 

Unless she gets rejected. It happens to women too, you know. And the funny thing is, most women want all the stuff that you consider unimportant, like companionship, intimacy, an emotional connection. So if she keeps meeting guys who just want casual sex, then she can't call any of them to get her desires met. None of them would be willing to fulfill her desire for a meaningful relationship, which is just as frustrating to her as it is to you when women aren't willing to fulfill your desire for sex.

 

You think women get whatever they want from men? You think women don't take a risk when dating? There are different kinds of risk. Your risk is financial, her risk is emotional and possibly physical. Sex may be your only desire, but most women desire more than that. Yes, I could log onto a dating site right now and arrange to have casual sex with 10 creeps tonight, if I wanted to. But why the hell would I want that? That's like putting a dumpster full of trash in front of me and saying "Look! You can eat whatever you want out of this dumpster. Whatever you want! Isn't that great?" Um...no, actually, it kinda sucks.

[dasein]

So the only possible reward is sex?

 

So you just skipped the "or otherwise" part of the sentence? Spare me the "bad attitude" insults, please.

 

Only virgins can be nice guys?

 

Out of context as opposed to discussing the very clear main point of the paragraph about many women preferring a sexually experienced man here on LS. Good for you that you find virgins attractive, start a thread on it though, or dig up one of the many on that very topic, and you will find yourself in the distinct minority among women here. Not a good bet for a man to volunteer to a woman that he is a virgin today, many threads here bear that out.

 

Why would a woman who doesn't want to be judged for her sexual frequency or experience feel free to judge a man on his? Double standard. But you know what? it's her right, and though mildly hypocritical, doesn't make her a piece of crap. Men judging women for their sexual past here are regularly condemned as... pieces of crap.

 

Unless she gets rejected. It happens to women too, you know.

 

What happens to women too, that they don't have complete control over whether or not to have sex on a first date? Women who choose to have sex with a single, available man of their choice will almost always get their desire (to have sex) met unless he happens to be gay, impotent or has some other problem. All outliers.

 

And the funny thing is, most women want all the stuff that you consider unimportant, like companionship, intimacy, an emotional connection.

 

All the more reason for them to wait as opposed to exercise their power of choice to have sex on the first date, and if those things are what most women want, men would be quite right in being suspicious of the women who did have first date sex because in addition to signaling impulisivity in her, it would also signal poor judgment in pursuing her stated life goals.

 

So if she keeps meeting guys who just want casual sex, then she can't call any of them to get her desires met. None of them would be willing to fulfill her desire for a meaningful relationship, which is just as frustrating to her as it is to you when women aren't willing to fulfill your desire for sex.

 

My post was a response to the "anyone who has sex on a first date loses their right to judge the other person," statement, in light of that, the above doesn't make any sense. A woman can call a man she finds attractive for sex any time, so why wouldn't a man be rightfully suspicious of her level of self-control if she has sex on first dates? her "life desires" are irrelevant, but again, if those are her life desires, all the more reason for her to wait, and not go on first dates with her ankles behind her head.

 

You think women get whatever they want from men?

 

If what they want is sex, then yes, pretty much, they can get it whenever they want, anything else is irrelevant to the issue I posted about, and to the points I made. You have a bad habit of putting words in my mouth.

 

Yes, I could log onto a dating site right now and arrange to have casual sex with 10 creeps tonight, if I wanted to.

 

Exactly, why would you do that? And if a woman did the equivalent by having indiscriminate first date sex, why wouldn't a man be justified in questioning that and judging her for it?

 

But you see, almost NO men can log onto a dating site right now and arrange to have sex with 10 women tonight. But you could, pretty much any woman can. So once more, if she has that available, why would she have sex on a first date if her stated desire was to have a relationship? Impulsivity? Poor judgment? Emotional problems? Personality disorder? I don't care which, it's not someone I want to take seriously, someone who has near complete control over an activity, unlike myself, who has stated goals conflicting with that activity, unlike myself, yet engages in it anyway. No double standard.

[Woggle]

As long as a woman is not repulsive to the point of making a person want to vomit she can pretty much get anything she wants.

[Cypress25]

As long as a woman is not repulsive to the point of making a person want to vomit she can pretty much get anything she wants.

 

As long as what she wants is sex, as dasein so eloquently put it. However, there are plenty of attractive, smart, interesting, desirable women who can't get whatever they want because they want something that many men are not willing to give. Maybe those women can get all the casual sex they want, but many of them struggle to get what they really want, which is a meaningful relationship.

 

Out of context as opposed to discussing the very clear main point of the paragraph about many women preferring a sexually experienced man here on LS. Good for you that you find virgins attractive, start a thread on it though, or dig up one of the many on that very topic, and you will find yourself in the distinct minority among women here. Not a good bet for a man to volunteer to a woman that he is a virgin today, many threads here bear that out.

 

I didn't say I find virgins attractive, I said I find nice guys attractive. Whether they're virgins or not doesn't matter to me.

 

Why would a woman who doesn't want to be judged for her sexual frequency or experience feel free to judge a man on his? Double standard. But you know what? it's her right, and though mildly hypocritical, doesn't make her a piece of crap. Men judging women for their sexual past here are regularly condemned as... pieces of crap.

 

I don't think women judge men for their sexual frequency. I think they judge men for their sexual skill. They assume that virgins will be bad in bed, and so they're reluctant to have sex with a virgin because they won't enjoy the experience. And they assume that experienced men will be great in bed, and so they anticipate a very enjoyable experience. Of course these assumptions are often false. There are plenty of virgins who happen to be naturals, and they're great in bed despite their lack of experience. And there are plenty of sexually experienced people who are still bad in bed.

 

But this is not the kind of judging that you're talking about. When you judge a woman as a slut, it's not because you think it will affect your experience with her. It's not because it will affect you in any way. You're just judging her for being as impulsive as you are. Of course, if she didn't have sex with you, then you'd be mad at her. So she can either have sex with you and be labeled a slut, or not have sex with you and be labeled a bitch. She can't win. You'll judge her either way.

 

What happens to women too, that they don't have complete control over whether or not to have sex on a first date?

 

You know, the man might not want to. I know it's hard to believe, but some men have standards. Some men even have self-control.

 

her "life desires" are irrelevant

 

We're gonna have to agree to disagree on that one. I don't think sex is the only desire that matters.

 

If what they want is sex, then yes, pretty much, they can get it whenever they want, anything else is irrelevant to the issue I posted about

 

Like I said, I don't think everything else is irrelevant. Sex doesn't happen in a vacuum. All of that other stuff can lead to sex or it can lead away from sex. Suppose I want sex right now. I'm single. I'm a reasonably attractive young woman. So by your logic, I should be able to call any guy I want and have sex with him. Off the top of my head, I can think of one person who wouldn't take that call: my ex-boyfriend. So I'd have to call someone else. But what if all the attractive guys I know all have girlfriends? Then I'd have to resort to having sex with a guy I don't even like, and that's not the kind of sex I want.

 

someone who has near complete control over an activity, unlike myself, who has stated goals conflicting with that activity, unlike myself, yet engages in it anyway.

 

So you're NOT a slut, because you're desperate and you take whatever you can get?

[Woggle]

You are right but I think if a woman has the qualities that would make her a good partner then she won't have that much trouble finding a suitable man.

[GivenUp0083]

Interesting how Cypress25 only addresses small fragments of people's posts rather than the entire point being made.

 

I suppose it's easier for her to twist others' words in such a manner.

 

If Cypress really wants to know what I've dealt with and what I've been through, she can just search my previous posts over the last 3-4 months.

 

As for why I'll lie in these types of scenarios is because it's easier, it's less effort, it's less risk.

 

As for why i don't want to be with this particular girl? I'm just not feeling it. She's really hard to have a conversation with. That's about it. Maybe it has nothing to do with her, maybe I just don't have anything left to give.

 

You could interpret that as sad, but right now I don't feel anything....and after months of emotional pain it actually feels really good. I'd much rather feel nothing at all and no longer care than be hurt that bad again.

[sally4sara]

Interesting how Cypress25 only addresses small fragments of people's posts rather than the entire point being made.

 

I suppose it's easier for her to twist others' words in such a manner.

 

If Cypress really wants to know what I've dealt with and what I've been through, she can just search my previous posts over the last 3-4 months.

 

As for why I'll lie in these types of scenarios is because it's easier, it's less effort, it's less risk.

 

As for why i don't want to be with this particular girl? I'm just not feeling it. She's really hard to have a conversation with. That's about it. Maybe it has nothing to do with her, maybe I just don't have anything left to give.

 

You could interpret that as sad, but right now I don't feel anything....and after months of emotional pain it actually feels really good. I'd much rather feel nothing at all and no longer care than be hurt that bad again.

 

I' m glad you can have a clear headed conversation about this subject. I paid you respect because I do feel that how you view this is a much lesser transgression. You didn't pepper it with invective or an aim to amuse at the expense of others. Rather than malice, you're operating with apathy and considering you took a personal hit with your break up I can identify. As I said before we've all been hurt. We could all swap horror stories for days and you might find you were dealt much smaller potatoes than others who still won't contribute to the vicious cycle. But I do get it. After a messy bust up your head isn't right. I had a small run like that too after my marriage ended, but I did make myself clear up front and well before they had feelings on the table. Still, some folks don't know a situation till they are in it and smarting.

 

But that I do get it and did experience some of the same response to new people after my own break up about attending to myself first, caring less about others, not putting all my efforts into one person for anything serious unless they stepped to that subject in extreme earnest - many of the fellas on here would call me slutty for that despite thinking that you doing the same is reasonable, normal considering your painful break up, and even intelligent. Some would even find it admirable. They would think the opposite of me even though I did not omit info and intent to people I dated at all. They would think it indicated that I was low quality, impulsive, not to be trusted and not give one whit that I too had just come out of a bad and painful ending to an 8 year relationship and sure AT THAT TEMPORARY POINT IN TIME, my head wasn't in the best place. Nope. For me and due to my gender it is a permanent blemish.

Really it matters not what people like that think if you would rather chew your own arm off than date someone who thinks that way, but, AND THIS ONE IS SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT ILK - that they would think this way is not even something I would call subtle misogyny. Its almost like they WANT to see people get hurt.

You're also not someone who is apathetic or even malicious to your current lover simply due to their participation with you. That is being a better person than quite a few fellas on here that haven't gone through or did go through but to a lesser degree, what you experienced.

 

As to Cypress - he/she is saying pretty much the same stuff about this subject that I said only with more sass and color. When some of the malicious fellows on here post about their antics, many other fellows will defend him by saying he is just being colorful and not dealing with intent to harm - let someone else speak against these practices and use "color" in their words as well? It gets written off as twisting words disrespectfully and only addressing fragments or whatever else someone could say to write them off. I'm not really making this point so much for your benefit as you did not do this, but for everyone reading. Heads up folks! The way you display your story will affect the reader; can I get a DUH? Tell it trashy and cold and no one but the hatebreed is going to think much of your actions. No point in mock surprise when people jump all over you with harsh words. And if you (universal you; not you specifically) are someone who would defend that kind of context when it supports the behavior of the path of least resistance but only for your gender - the omitting and/or out right lying; the poor treatment after the fact, then I don't think you can very well speak of anyone's character with judgment.

Edited September 10, 2011 by sally4sara

[rafallus]

As I read this, after the part about not putting down others for wanting/not wanting sex early has been pretty firmly established, I fail to see the huge issue.

 

If you don't want to have sex with somebody, who wants to have sex with you, just don't. He/she will probably find somebody else, and you won't compromise your beliefs, if you really care about them.

 

And it's not like you can't stop the buildup leading to sex early on.

 

Seriously, sex is becoming overrated issue IMO.

[AHardDaysNight]

As I read this, after the part about not putting down others for wanting/not wanting sex early has been pretty firmly established, I fail to see the huge issue.

 

If you don't want to have sex with somebody, who wants to have sex with you, just don't. He/she will probably find somebody else, and you won't compromise your beliefs, if you really care about them.

 

And it's not like you can't stop the buildup leading to sex early on.

 

Seriously, sex is becoming overrated issue IMO.

 

Agreed.

 

If it goes against your core beliefs, simply just don't have sex. That person will find someone who wants sex, and you'll find someone who doesn't.

[ThsAmericanLife]

A man who has sex on a first date might be one of the top % of guys for whom sex is available on a first date regulary, or much more likely, he is not. He may have had 10 first dates over the last six months and been reasonably charming and forward, yet no sex resulted. He paid for all those dates. When he asked the women out for a second date, five blew him off without any reply. Two of the remaining five went out with him again for the second date, still no sex, and went right home to blow their FWB. They ditched our guy after the second or third date. The last three, HE decided that he didn't like two of them, which is his right, and the last girl may or may not pan out into anything. That's the way dating works for 90-95% of men, MUCH risk, relatively little chance of reward, sexual or otherwise. He may be flirty and sexually forward with all those women, but has NO CONTROL over whether his efforts will result in sex. If he doesn't try with them all, though, he won't get ANY sex, that's for sure, and if we are being 100% honest, his not trying for sex will actually turn most of them off.

 

Women regularly post here that a lack of experience in men is a turnoff for many women. If a guy acts like a niceguy virgin on the first date, not only will he have 0 chance of getting sex, but he will also send up red flags in the women. This is actually a TRUE double standard in that women expect not to be judged for their level of sexual experience, yet freely judge men for their level of sexual experience.

 

Now, let's contrast that with a female dater. She is taken out and treated to 10 dates. She can have first date sex on each and every one of those dates if she chooses and the guy is willing (odds are all of them will be). If she decides to go out with five of the men on a second date, once more, she can choose to have sex on ALL FIVE of those dates or not, she has complete control. Now say she then goes out on third dates with 3 of the five, once more, she can have sex or not at her TOTAL DISCRETION, with those remaining guys. She can wait until she has narrowed down the field to someone she likes who likes her, or she can start having sex on the first date. Why would someone who has that level of control EVER choose to have sex on a first date unless she has impulsivity, baggage, or emotional problems or issues? Why not wait to decide, over several dates, if she likes them? After all, she can call ANY of them at ANY time and likely get her desire for sex met.

 

Therefore, because of the immense differences between men and women in this regard, and the different levels of control they have, it is completely reasonable for a man to judge a woman for first date sex when he was a willing participant also. And even if it were a little unreasonable on his part, women apply MANY such double standards to men, I will happily list some of them if you like.

 

So what's really tiring is seeing the bogus double standard argument used here by women to justify female promiscuity, who say that by having sex a man loses all right to judge a woman for having sex. BS. Very few men have the level of control of sex and whether or not to even be promiscuous that almost ALL women have. End of story, finito.

 

blah blah blah.

 

Apparently the thread you quoted is the only one you've read from me?? I don't fit any of your stereotypes. Most of my other female colleagues and friends don't either.

 

I have two friends... both highly successful, beautiful, and very happily married for more than 10 years. Both of their now husbands WAITED. About two months or probably close to 10 dates or so. And my friends weren't fending off constant pressure from them either. They were respectful and caring.

 

I've got plenty of proof from my day-to-day life that discretion on the part of BOTH the man and woman ends up with more satisfying LTR's.

 

However, I'm guessing this one area of debate is probably a difference in socio-economic and cultural conditions and so not worth getting wrapped around the axle over. It would be just as fruitful to debate why excessive TV watching is associated with different socio-economic classes as well.

 

The kind of man you mention is the kind of man who will cheat or dump a woman the minute a BBD comes along because he has indicated that he will have sex with any willing female. Not someone I or women like me care to invest in.

 

Unfortunately, too many women just 'settle' because they assume that all men cheat. I don't. I know there are good men out there... the ones who aren't sticking it to women because they can is my first filter.

[ThsAmericanLife]

Agreed.

 

If it goes against your core beliefs, simply just don't have sex. That person will find someone who wants sex, and you'll find someone who doesn't.

 

... and I'm going to argue once more that the ability and desire to hold off on sex until legitimate intimacy exists has absolutely nothing to do with how much someone 'likes sex'.

 

In fact, I'd argue that the ability to wait... while also having a strong sex drive is a huge mark of character in MY book.

 

many studies have indicated that emotional intelligence is highly correlated with two qualities...

 

- empathy

- ability to delay gratification.

 

Note that I said delay until 'legitimate intimacy exists'. That is a condition I couldn't begin to define for anyone else.

 

However, I have a REALLY hard time believing it happens on the first date or even the 3rd with a complete stranger. I'm less skeptical about situations where people get to know each other in some other way IRL dating.

[ThsAmericanLife]

Interesting how Cypress25 only addresses small fragments of people's posts rather than the entire point being made.

 

I suppose it's easier for her to twist others' words in such a manner.

 

If Cypress really wants to know what I've dealt with and what I've been through, she can just search my previous posts over the last 3-4 months.

 

As for why I'll lie in these types of scenarios is because it's easier, it's less effort, it's less risk.

 

As for why i don't want to be with this particular girl? I'm just not feeling it. She's really hard to have a conversation with. That's about it. Maybe it has nothing to do with her, maybe I just don't have anything left to give.

 

You could interpret that as sad, but right now I don't feel anything....and after months of emotional pain it actually feels really good. I'd much rather feel nothing at all and no longer care than be hurt that bad again.

 

I'm sure you feel your hurt is the worst anyone could ever experience. I'm in no position to judge how much hurt you feel. What you decide to do about it is what defines your character. I could give you a million examples of people who triumphed over their pain by showing forgiveness and gratitude, but that takes effort.

 

I believe you are using your pain as an excuse to be lazy and are now rather starting to 'enjoy' the pain you are causing others.

 

You can choose another way... but I'm doubting you will. I hope I'm wrong.

[phineas]

Ah, but that is not what I said.

 

I said I 'dated' boys from other HS... not the same thing. I didn't lose my virginity until 17... As a senior in HS. See... you think you are so smart

 

Yes, I know in YOUR world... dating = f**g. I'm betting your screening method is equally as imperfect. But whatever.

 

But, here is the inspiration for my dating boys in other schools...

 

There was a girl who dated the same guy from 10th grade through 12th... same school. They eventually got married... Every body in school knew everything about her body parts, what kind of sex they had (or didn't have)... you name it.

 

...and I'm a GIRL!! It wasn't like I was privy to locker room conversations. Did she tell??? Did he tell??? didn't matter.

 

Yeah, every woman puts on the same front. Act like they are of the highest quality the doesn't have casual sex, never had ONS & waits 6 months before sex and has only had 2 partners.

 

blah,blah,blah

 

Please, who are you trying to convince? me or yourself?

 

you keep preaching "casual sex is boring" as if you are better than those who partake in it.

Well you must of participated in it yourself considering how many times you have proclaimed how boring it is.

 

You know what I find boring?

Hypocrites.

Edited September 10, 2011 by phineas

[ThsAmericanLife]

You are right but I think if a woman has the qualities that would make her a good partner then she won't have that much trouble finding a suitable man.

 

unless those same men are getting bogus advice on how to date... and getting kicked to the curb by the same women they seek to form LTR's with.

 

I can't tell you how many men I've FZ'd for following some of the crappy advice put out here. Are they decent men? Some of them. But the ever cherished 'window of opportunity' was closed to them because of poor choices they made early in our budding relationship.

 

To read it here, men are supposed to f*ck anything that lets them, date as many women as their schedule can manage, hold off on asking for exclusivity... and by all means, don't tell a woman how you feel.

 

They are constantly told (usually by other a-hole men who seem to have a vested interest in keeping their buddies single and out boozing and cruising with them) that 'nice guys finish last'.

 

Total BS. I know plenty of very nice guys who are happily married and have been for years.