casual sex with people you don't really like

[Woggle]

I bet at least half of those happily married guys are getting cheated on by their wives and another ten percent are with women who have lost all attraction. I don't know your friends but it would not shock me. If you know these women who truly appreciate good men maybe you should let some struggling good men know.

[ThsAmericanLife]

You know what I find boring?

Hypocrites.

 

Yep, me too. I also find people who jump to conclusions with zero facts to be even more boring.

 

One doesn't need to be a pot head to decide that smoking pot and doing drugs is a waste of time.

 

One doesn't need to engage in routine casual sex to decide it is boring.

 

...and I'll still argue that your screening methods are faulty.

 

All you are doing is screening for good liars because you don't really care to take the time to get the whole story.

 

What you WANT to do is engage in exactly the kind of behavior I've objected to. You want sex ASAP... but reserve the right to next her and call her a slut after the fact because you are too lazy to do the work in advance... even though you are engaging in the same behavior. Typical. Very typical.

[ThsAmericanLife]

I bet at least half of those happily married guys are getting cheated on by their wives and another ten percent are with women who have lost all attraction. I don't know your friends but it would not shock me. If you know these women who truly appreciate good men maybe you should let some struggling good men know.

 

You really need to get out more.

 

Try a different website perhaps... find a way to get into a better circle of friends.

 

Maybe it makes you feel better to think that all women do the above.... sounds like a decent excuse to avoid getting involved with someone again..

 

As IF you are the only person who has ever been cheated on... Please. Don't get me started.

[ThsAmericanLife]

But you see, almost NO men can log onto a dating site right now and arrange to have sex with 10 women tonight. QUOTE]

 

Sure they could, and apparently plenty here do.

 

They lie about their intentions, or simply choose women they consider 'beneath' them in terms of looks or other qualities.

 

... it is couched in terms of 'building confidence' and other 'nice' things.

 

I've observed that most of your posts are simply directed towards encouraging men to engage in hateful and hurtful behavior in order to get sex... rather than encourage them to build their character and other qualities to develop genuine, legitimate attraction that has nothing to do with lying... slutting... behavior.

[dasein]

But you see, almost NO men can log onto a dating site right now and arrange to have sex with 10 women tonight.

 

Sure they could, and apparently plenty here do.

 

Where are they? Where exactly are the male posters here on LS who profess to be able to set up ten sexual encounters at a time using OLD the way pretty much any woman could. They don't exist. I can find ten or more who express frustration with the male OLD experience though.

 

I've observed that most of your posts are simply directed towards encouraging men to engage in hateful and hurtful behavior in order to get sex... rather than encourage them to build their character and other qualities

 

That's a lie, or you are deluded, Which? Or rather cite some of my posts that encourage men to do anything hateful or hurtful. Spare me the scolding unless you can back it up. We've all experienced that particular female "discussion" tactic here and it gets really tiresome.

 

I encourage everyone, men and women, to see through the cultural and political lies that burden gender relations in the U.S. because those lies cause extreme social damage, are devastating the institution of marriage, are demoralizing men and causing them to become jaded and cynical. Part of this is asking women to admit that both genders share responsibility for the status quo. If you find that position "hateful" or "hurtful" then you have identified yourself as part of the problem.

[oaks]

Where are they? Where exactly are the male posters here on LS who profess to be able to set up ten sexual encounters at a time using OLD the way pretty much any woman could. They don't exist.

 

Maybe they don't exist, but if they do I wouldn't expect them to be posting on here since it doesn't sound like they need much help with their dating.

[dasein]

Maybe they don't exist, but if they do I wouldn't expect them to be posting on here since it doesn't sound like they need much help with their dating.

 

Read thread, especially the "apparently plenty here do" part before posting?

[bac]

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.

 

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.

 

Is that how you date? And if so why do you date like this? 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.

 

IMO, mostly men think like that.

It is much more complicated for women. We get married the bad boys and the good boys at the same rate because we typically do not know how bad they are before we get married.

We have sex on the certain dates because of many other personal reasons and preferences. If we have sex with a guy, we typically believe that he is a good guy even for everyone else it is clear that he is a hopeless jerk.

[oaks]

Read thread, especially the "apparently plenty here do" part before posting?

 

Yes, I did. I was basically agreeing with you.

[ThsAmericanLife]

 

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.

 

... and since another poster was so kind to avoid the truly useful bit of information in my prior post, I'll post it again.

 

Here is a young woman, just starting out in the 'dating' world, exploring her sexuality with someone she supposedly trusts...the boy she dates throughout high school... one could hardly call HER a slut, yet she gets talked about the same way as one some would annoint with that label. They did end up getting married, but I'm not sure why. It is a pretty safe bet that it was him who did all of the blabbing. Sure, perhaps forgiveable given his age, but still.

 

This is a lesson I've taken with me for over 30 years. I've worked around all men for my entire adult life. Only TWICE have I ever thought about dating someone I worked with. In over 20 years. The outcomes for women who don't follow my policy at work are equally unkind. There is a woman manager I know... very pretty, smart, everything you could imagine... but people are starting to 'talk' about her because, in the 6 years she has been there, she has dated two men. One of them for over a year.

 

Just one more way that some men try to cut the legs off of powerful, smart women. Call them a 'slut'.

 

Nice try. Not working.

[ThsAmericanLife]

I encourage everyone, men and women, to see through the cultural and political lies that burden gender relations in the U.S. because those lies cause extreme social damage, are devastating the institution of marriage, are demoralizing men and causing them to become jaded and cynical. Part of this is asking women to admit that both genders share responsibility for the status quo. If you find that position "hateful" or "hurtful" then you have identified yourself as part of the problem.

 

Ah...bullsh*t. I routinely point out flaws in gender based stereotyping and doublestandards. So do other people, and you trash them (mostly women, I should point out).

 

Then, you befriend people like Mr. Nightmare Merchant and he gives you hearty pats on the back for doing his dirty work.

 

Good for you.

[dasein]

Ah...bullsh*t. I routinely point out flaws in gender based stereotyping and doublestandards. So do other people, and you trash them (mostly women, I should point out).

 

Then, you befriend people like Mr. Nightmare Merchant and he gives you hearty pats on the back for doing his dirty work.

 

Good for you.

 

You posted a blatant lie about my posting habits. I asked you to back it up. You can't because you know that you are lying. You continue with more lying. So who is really full of sh-t here? You are.

[phineas]

Yep, me too. I also find people who jump to conclusions with zero facts to be even more boring.

 

One doesn't need to be a pot head to decide that smoking pot and doing drugs is a waste of time.

 

One doesn't need to engage in routine casual sex to decide it is boring.

 

There are facts that pot is bad for you. Scientific studies.

Where are the scientific studies that show "casual sex is boring"?

 

Take your holier than thou attitude & preach it to the school kids.

 

Save your time & your text & stop stalking me. I aint interested.

You've followed me around this forum for weeks quoting me & lobing your sanctimonious "casual sex is boring" crap over & over again.

 

Grow up.

 

For a "scientist" you seem to lack any type of scientific method for your basis that "casual sex is boring".

 

...and I'll still argue that your screening methods are faulty.

 

All you are doing is screening for good liars because you don't really care to take the time to get the whole story.

 

If all I want is casual sex like you have claimed, then why do I need to screen for quality?

 

What you WANT to do is engage in exactly the kind of behavior I've objected to. You want sex ASAP... but reserve the right to next her and call her a slut after the fact because you are too lazy to do the work in advance... even though you are engaging in the same behavior. Typical. Very typical.

 

See my above comment. If all I want is to hit it & quit it then why do I need to screen for quality?

 

Also, show me where I said I wanted sex ASAP, & reserve the right to call them sluts & next them. SHOW ME.

 

You can't because you are making it up.

 

And oh look, now that i've backed you into a corner you are lobbing insults.

No surprise there.

 

I eagerly await your proof that shows where I demand sex ASAP & next chicks for being sluts.

 

This dun' be good.

[phineas]

That's a lie, or you are deluded, Which? Or rather cite some of my posts that encourage men to do anything hateful or hurtful. Spare me the scolding unless you can back it up. We've all experienced that particular female "discussion" tactic here and it gets really tiresome.

 

Yes it does get tiresome. She told some lies about me also in this thread.

[ThsAmericanLife]

Sources:

 

1)"I know how to deal with women like this now. I consider low quality & really only good for casual dating (sex)."

 

2) "Sex is not some mystical gift a woman offers up to a man who proves himself worthy."

 

3) "I really don't have a problem with waiting & getting to know someone IF THEY ARE A QUALITY WOMAN."

 

4) "I can pretty much tell if a woman has spent her life as a cum dumpster without even trying to kiss her just by listening to what she has to say."

 

5) "When I figure out the true identity of woman x, I drop them.

But sometimes i'll waste a few months on them first. :sick:"

 

You say you have no problems waiting for a 'quality woman', but also have no problems with casual sex. Then you drop her if you come to the conclusion she has engaged in the same behavior you say you give yourself license for. Not before using her for a few months though, apparently.

 

See... I assume most people here DO read. But hey, you asked.

 

My memory, while not flawless, is actually pretty good.

 

And as far as the 'casual sex is boring'... the posts from men complaining how they 'feel nothing' after casual sex tends to back that up. Then again, maybe they just feel nothing all of the time, and it has nothing to do with the sex. That might be the case too. In that case, I'd suggest counseling for depression instead of risking STDs.

 

I dunno. Call me silly. I certainly don't 'feel nothing' after a no-holds-barred romp with someone I love and trust. Just the opposite.

[ThsAmericanLife]

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.

 

I dance ballet. Have been on pointe for about three years.

 

My 'bucket list' is pretty long. What is funny is that some men will complain about women seeing other men and multi-dating. I never did the multi-dating thing. Instead, the thought usually turns to... "Hmmm... would I rather see so-n-so, or would I like to learn how to read music again... ride my motorcycle... bake a souffle" or whatever.

 

Yes, the thought of tolerating anyone uninteresting for a free meal does seem laughable... especially since I've never, not once, in all of my life ever expected a man to pay. I've always offered. Regardless of the level of attraction. That pretty much falls on deaf ears here though.

[ThsAmericanLife]

Posted by me:

 

 

I've observed that most of your posts are simply directed towards encouraging men to engage in hateful and hurtful behavior in order to get sex... rather than encourage them to build their character and other qualities

 

Posted by Dasein:

 

That's a lie, or you are deluded, Which? Or rather cite some of my posts that encourage men to do anything hateful or hurtful. Spare me the scolding unless you can back it up. We've all experienced that particular female "discussion" tactic here and it gets really tiresome.

 

Response:

 

Happy to. I refer kind readers to your posts in the thread started by Mr. Dream Merchant titled "Once I get it, I don't want it anymore". They are numerous.

 

and to your posts in the thread discussing a book called "The Game" by Neil Strauss.

 

In both, you have supported people who lie and manipulate others for the purposes of getting sex... and make a point of attacking anyone who objects to people being 'used' for that purpose.

 

That would be 'encouraging men to engage in hateful and hurtful behavior' in my book.

 

People know how to read... and now they know where to look should they be interested.

 

Have a good evening...

[dasein]

most of your posts are simply directed towards encouraging men to engage in hateful and hurtful behavior in order to get sex... rather than encourage them to build their character and other qualities

 

That would be 'encouraging men to engage in hateful and hurtful behavior' in my book.

 

Sell crazy somewhere else. (should I cite that quote to Jack the Ripper... or Sweeney Todd?)

 

None of my posts in those threads encourage men to engage in hateful or hurtful behavior in order to get sex, and only in your warped "book" is taking up for a poster who is being accused of doing things he DID NOT DO the equivalent of encouragement. In that thread, I stated several times that he had a bad attitude, and one of my first posts in the thread was advising him to lay off of the NSA for awhile. How exactly does that get him more "hateful hurtful" sex?

 

Stop the lies already. CITE some of my posts that ENCOURAGE men to engage in hateful or hurtful behavior or STFU already. You can't because they don't exist, and if there were one or two somewhere out of 600+ that could be stretched and twisted as encouraging hateful or hurtful behavior, that certainly isn't a majority.

 

Commenting over and over about someone's posts, especially repeating unsubstantiated lies about someone's posting history, is something you might want to consider carefully going forward.

[ThsAmericanLife]

Sell crazy somewhere else. (should I cite that quote to Jack the Ripper... or Sweeney Todd?)

 

None of my posts in those threads encourage men to engage in hateful or hurtful behavior in order to get sex, and only in your warped "book" is taking up for a poster who is being accused of doing things he DID NOT DO the equivalent of encouragement. In that thread, I stated several times that he had a bad attitude, and one of my first posts in the thread was advising him to lay off of the NSA for awhile. How exactly does that get him more "hateful hurtful" sex?

 

Stop the lies already. CITE some of my posts that ENCOURAGE men to engage in hateful or hurtful behavior or STFU already. You can't because they don't exist, and if there were one or two somewhere out of 600+ that could be stretched and twisted as encouraging hateful or hurtful behavior, that certainly isn't a majority.

 

Commenting over and over about someone's posts, especially repeating unsubstantiated lies about someone's posting history, is something you might want to consider carefully going forward.

 

Like I said... people can go to the threads and make up their own minds. Easy enough.